How Connecticut Will Spiral Out of Control

John Hames shared with you:   How Connecticut Will Spiral Out of Control thetruthaboutguns.com - Tens of thousands of Connecticut gun owners failed to register, surrender, destroy or remove from the state their modern sporting rifles (a.k.a., assault rifles) and standard capacity ammunition magazines (a.k.a., high-capacity ammunition magazines) by the January deadline. They refused to comply because the law infringes on their natural, civil and Constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms. This act of civil disobedience has made them Class D felons. So now what? There are lots of ways this could get real ugly real fast. Here's how I see it going down . . . How Connecticut Will Spiral Out of Control  March 7, 2014 at 16:00  Written by Robert Farago   Tens of thousands of Connecticut gun owners failed to register, surrender, destroy or remove from the state their modern sporting rifles (a.k.a., assault rifles) and standard capacity ammunition magazines (a.k.a., high-capacity ammunition magazines) by the January deadline. They refused to comply because the law infringes on their natural, civil and Constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms. This act of civil disobedience has made them Class D felons. So now what? There are lots of ways this could get real ugly real fast. Here's how I see it going down . . . A doorstep firefight between Connecticut gun owners and state or federal police come to confiscate their "assault rifle" or "high cap mag" is unlikely. The State will not go door-to-door to grab guns. There will be no midnight no-knock raids or flash-bang police parties. For a while. If Connecticut political leaders and their law enforcement lackeys can hold off on forcible confiscation until after the November mid-term elections, they will. But they probably can't/won't. As Ralph reminds us, history is driven by events. If there's another AR-related spree killing, or an unrelated arrest goes seriously awry (with an "assault rifle"), or a gun rights protest turns violent, the State will not let a good crisis go to waste act on behalf of public safety. Why not? The State enjoys overwhelming public support for their gun control policies. That's how the laws came to be. The State being what it is, its functionaries are predisposed to preserving law and order (i.e. defending their own authority). The Democratic machine controlling Connecticut knows that gun owners are not "friends of ours." And they know how easy it will be to paint lawbreaking gun owners as public enemies. Bottom line: they will move against Constitution State gun owners in violation of the law when the time is right. The good news: the cops in charge of making the collar will make damn sure that any firearms confiscation campaign is a complete success – at least from their point-of-view. By that I mean that law enforcement will do everything possible to make sure they don't get killed. Or even fired upon. As we saw with the Department of Homeland Security's arrest of gun dealer Bob Adams in New Mexico, the cops are smart enough to intercept ostensibly felonious gun owners away from their homestead, using speed, surprise and overwhelming force. So when Connecticut chooses to make a symbolic collar on a Class D gun owner, that's how it'll go down. And there's not a damn thing sympathetic gun owners anywhere will be able to do about it. After the fact, gun rights advocates/patriots will kvetch like crazy. But they will notmount anything other than a legal rescue effort to spring the gun owner(s) from prison. Which is just as well; the security surrounding the scofflaws will be extremely tight and the cops will be equally on edge. Both the fact of the arrest(s) and their own impotence to correct the situation will inflame gun owners in Connecticut and across the country. They'll organize themselves into militias. Note: the point of a citizen militia is not self-defense. Citizen militias are created to liberate fellow citizens from tyranny. See where I'm going with this? Well so does the government. Citizen militias aren't illegal (they get an honorable mention in the preamble to the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution), but the government hates them with a passion undimmed (Hutaree anyone?). When talk of protecting gun rights turns to group preparation for armed, post-confiscation conflict,that's when the situation will start to get seriously ugly. You'll know what's coming when you start hearing the words "domestic terrorists" in relation to gun rights groups. The government will feel "forced" to "respond to the threat" proactively; they will swoop down on militia leaders and do some wet work on web work (killing websites to prevent "criminal" communications). In the aftermath of these raids, the State will no doubt producing damning evidence of terrorist intent and a HUGE arsenal of guns (including illegal "assault weapons") and ammunition (including "high-capacity" magazines). Hopefully not; the State may not be as stupid as they have shown themselves to be by passing these laws in the first place. They may hang fire. But they will not back down. As I said above, the State must exert its authority. It's what governments do. No matter how measured or reasonable their reactions to gun rights protesters, he situation will continue to grow increasingly contentious. Both sides will be looking for an excuse to act. One side to recover their lost rights, the other to establish the rule of law. At some point, worlds will collide. Violently. I don't think it will be a massacre. I think it'll be far worse than that: an armed stand-off. MRAP-equipped SWAT teams will be forced to wait-out a heavily armed Class D felon or felons.  Et voila: Waco redux. Only this time, the cops may face opposition from theother side of the barricades, from armed Americans hailing from in-state or across the country. Not many. Not the first time. But some. Enough for the situation to descend into bloody chaos. If that kind of conflict occurs, things will go completely out of control. The crackdown on gun rights supporters by government agents will be intense, on both the State and the federal level. Gun rights advocates' response will be no less intense. Quite how it plays out from there I have no clue. But it will be a civil war of one sort or another. As the weather warms and temperatures rise, there are only two ways to avoid this escalation into bloodshed in the Constitution State: the Supreme Court strikes down the Connecticut gun control laws or the Connecticut legislature repeals the laws. Neither is bound to happen. Although I don't know the future, the future I see ain't that pretty at all. And what about gun owners in California, New Jersey, New York, Maryland and Rhode Island? God help them all. Available on the App Store.

John Hames