Seatbelt Laws and Gun Control

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

First, an acknowledgement. A reader suggested this – I’m merely taking the ball down the field… .guns lead 2

Getting pulled over for no other reason than you weren’t wearing a seatbelt is now a routine thing. People accept this as normal, even reasonable.

Well, most people do.

I can assure you that the reverse was once true. Watch Mad Men, if you don’t believe me. It may be a TV show, I know – but it shows with extreme accuracy the way things were, attitude-wise, in the America I was born into. In the 1960s, there may have been a termagant or two screeching about seatbelts and such like – but they were regarded as termagants almost universally. Cops had better things to do – and so did most of us – than to worry about whether a grown man was wearing a seatbelt.

But the termagants kept at it, and by the 1980s, they finally got traction.The first mandatory “buckle up” law was passed – ironically enough, in the Orwellian year 1984. In – not ironically at all – New York. Fast forward to 2014 and only one (very tiny) state – New Hampshire – does not threaten adults with violence for electing not to wear a seat belt in their own car. In all the others, it is an offense for which one may be waylaid at gunpoint and compelled to hand over money. (Yes, at gunpoint. See what happens if you ignore the cop’s order to buckle-up, or – down the road – if you refuse to pay the fine.)

What’s this got to do with gun control – that is, with restricting, then criminalizing, possession of a firearm by ordinary civilians?guns lead

Unfortunately, a great deal.

This business in Connecticut – the draconian ban on “high capacity” magazines and “assault” rifles – sets exactly the sort of precedent that New York’s buckle up – or else – law did back in ’84. In each case, the state redefined what had previously been matters of personal choice as matters beyond personal choice. Or rather, matters to be decided by the personal choices of politicians and bureaucrats and then imposed on the masses at gunpoint.

Thirty years ago, there was outrage – and mockery – emanating from other states.  Those silly New Yorkers! Yankees, don’t you know.

That would never fly here.guns 3

And yet, it flies everywhere now, just about (with the exception of tiny NH, a sliver of liberties past and now largely forgotten).

The same will happen with regard to the criminalization of various arbitrary categories of firearms and accessories. Precedent becomes practice. If they get away with it in CT, they will try to get away with it in other states. If the people of CT Submit & Obey – if they meekly hand over their weapons, accepting the premise that possessing a rifle or a pistol is tantamount to shooting up a school full of kids (in the same way, according to this warped logic, that possessing a vagina is tantamount to being a prostitute) it’ll be a bellwether – clear indication that while people will hue and cry over their gun rights – over their human rights –  they will not (most of them) actually defend them once laws are passed rescinding them.

They will, indeed, Submit & Obey.obey pic

Just as they have with regard to seat belt laws. Just as they have with regard to being handled – literally handled – like felons being processed at a prison in order to board an airplane or attend a football game.

All these things would have sounded surreal, impossible, to the Mad Men America of the 1960s. And yet they are now part of our lives, routine. Some of us grumble under our breath – but few of us actively protest, much less openly resist.

Perhaps the time is coming for that. If it is not already here.

I won’t put my life on the line over the seatbelt law. I evade it, I ignore it – to the extent I can. But if I find myself waylaid by a cop over it, I’ll play along. I won’t argue, I’ll sign the damnable piece of payin’ paper and send them their extortion. Then I’ll go back to not wearing my seatbelt until the next time I get caught.

But if my state should enact a law such as the one now in effect in Connecticut? If they order me to surrender my guns – or else?SWAT pic

It may be time to accept “or else.”

Tens of thousands of CT citizens may have already come to exactly this conclusion. 350,000 of them, actually (see here). That’s how many “unregistered” – and now, banned – weapons are estimated to be out there, in the hands of citizens who – so far – have refused to Submit & Obey. They are now felons, under CT law.

For the moment, CT authoritarians are laying low – not yet going door-to-door in search of “illegal” weapons. But they inevitably will. They must. A law not enforced is a null law. (Would you “buckle up” if you knew no cop would bother you about it? Maybe you would – but  but many people would not. I certainly would not.)

So, it’s either – or. The state backs down. Or the people submit. There’s no middle ground.

And that’s an explosive situation.

Throw it in the Woods?

Share Button


  1. There’s a very tragic continuum in mainstream blue pill human thought, wherein generally if somebody tends to be less religious, then they tend to be more statist.

    Like Communists are atheists, most socialists are agnostics, and so on. Whereas somebody tends to be anti-state, then there is a tendency to be more religious.

    I think this arises from the fundamental problem that society has, which is why should we obey those in authority? Why should we obey moral rules?

    Those who are more religious have the magic pixie dust called God to sprinkle on their commandments, to raise them from mere mortal rules to divine absolutes.

    Whereas those who don’t believe in the magic dust of religion have to turn to the state and to physical aggression, to incarceration, to kidnapping, to imprisonment, in order to turn mere human rules into moral absolutes.

    So you kind of have to hold your nose, like if you’re an atheist you pretty much have to hang out with people who are very pro-state, and if you’re anti-state, then you have to hang out with people who are very religious.

    But neither of these approaches solves the basic problem of human morality.

    Threatening somebody with supernatural punishment is merely verbal abuse, and it doesn’t raise the truth status of any of the moral rules proposed.

    Whereas threatening people with kidnapping and incarceration is mere physical abuse, and also does not make any moral rules that are supported by such attacks any more valid.

    It is really only philosophy and reasoned red pill discussion that will solve this problem for us and will give us reasonable and consistent and incurable arguments from first principles that will allow us to convince people to be virtuous, rather than threatening them with random and destructive punishments if they fail to conform to fairly arbitrary rules.

    The first thing we need to do is to understand that we don’t have a good rational basis for social rules at the moment.

    That’s a real tragedy, something that we all need to work to sort out, to figure out, to solve.

    Until we recognize that we don’t have a rational and philosophical basis for morality at the moment, we are forever going to be swinging between these two awful poles of the verbal abuse of religion and the physical abuse of statism and authoritarianism.

    We don’t have to. We can find a third rational peaceful way to have social rules without abuses and I hope we can aill continue to explore this incredibly fertile area in the realm of life philosophy and ways of approaching and dealing with the real world.

  2. So if one was moving down under, what kind of hobbies, small businesses, might such a one want to engage in?

    Become a security guard. And have a gun for work? Work at a pawn shop. Join a lawndart or knifethrowing club?

    Or just get what I always get, but quietly. If ever Allah forbid, the time comes, do what I do, I’d know what time it was.

    I’d have somewhere secondary to put it. Near an exit. Hire someone to paint devotional custom crosses on it, keep expensive well used bible here. The Lord will provide.

    Construction and Repair Business

    Pest Control Business – Maybe w/ Ignitable Chem Mix for tough jobs,p_ord:pd&tbm=shop&ei=nUQkU-C3A5fjoASProGgBg&ved=0CIQBELsNKAM#spd=3527032392417643678

    Antique Air Raid Siren Collecting + Ear Plug Collecting

    Concrete Acid Powerwashing Business

    Flamethrower Kit For Vehicles Installation Business

    Oxy-Acetylene Welding Service

    Livestock Services Business

    Tree Service Business….0…1c.1.37.serp..0.1.88.v0KnqzD6RIc#spd=2321833838677006958

    Night Vision Equip Sales + Home Wiring Remote Sales,pdtr0:708299%7C708315,vw:l,p_ord:pd,pdtr1:708309%7C1%241,pdtr2:708217%7C708285&tbm=shop&ei=VkckU8bQMoeCogTLpoKQBQ&ved=0CNcGEMEJKAQwFA&biw=800&bih=505#spd=14777059699550043635

    Just thinking out loud, seeing as there’s no firearms, knives, baseball bats, and such things allowed or usable on the field of play.

    Maybe a real estate investment business. Or any business that uses itinerant daylaborers you hire for longterm and know to be stable and trustworthy.

    When employing such nearby lifetime tenant perimeter technique. Get the type of guys are said to be willing do to protect those who provide living quarters or employment. Especially when they’re far from their home grid, and long ago off the books themselves.

  3. Almost 20 years after our local gun-control orgy in Australia, it’s now difficult for anyone as young as me (early 30’s) to recall a time when ridiculous levels of state intrusion into private gun ownership were anything but the norm.

    We currently have absolutely ZERO chance of a political turnaround in the matter. It’s only a matter of time before the old breed dies out and we shooters go from “marginalized” to “final solution”.

    I’m only praying for the big currency crash to hit before we get that far.

    • Wombat – I sympathize with you. Maybe you could move up here with us and we could send Clover down under? You know, like a trade – we get another shooter and the limp wristed panty waist politicians get another brain-washed tax feeder. It’d be a win-win for everyone. 😉

      • I’d love that in some respects, but Australia is my home. We will all have our battles to fight. We may not have all the cool gear you guys have, but unlike your own federal government, our local statist bastards in the parliament have to balance the budget every now and then, so our local police departments are not exactly swimming in Bearcats and M4s.

        The old SMLE was built to kill fascists, and I suspect every old coot around here has one stashed somewhere in their wall space. It’ll get the job done when the time comes.

        That said, when my boys are grown and the fires of civil war have died down, I would be quite happy to make an extended visit, assuming transpacific travel is an option by that stage.

      • Boothe, no way are you to send down clover to Australia. Unless it is in Antarctic Australia. We have our share of nutcake politicians who are in love with speed & red light scameras. And those nutcakes are both Liberals and Labor party bastards.

        However, on second thought you could send him in a few years to the “colony” that will be set up next to the nuclear wasted dump in the middle of the outback, hundreds of kilometers from civilization!!!

      • Wombat, to5 – I was just kidding. I wouldn’t impose clover on you folks. From everything I’ve seen and read, I really like Australia and I’ve really liked the Aussies I’ve met over the years. No, clover’s our problem along with all his kith and kin. You have enough problems of your own. We’ll deal with clover. But you’re still welcome to come up here and visit your cousins any time. And if you do, we’ll go out and pop a few caps together in clover’s honor!

  4. Meanwhile in the UK:

    “Wearing it could have made a difference – she might still have been hurt but it might not have led to her death.

    “The law should be tougher with stiffer fines.”

    She added: “I always make sure the grandkids are strapped in properly and I tell them ‘Look at what happened to Aunty Christine, she could still be here if she’d worn her belt’.

    Never enough.

  5. Interesting Facts and Statistics:

    Murders with guns has been decreasing since 2007, maybe even earlier (that’s as far as the chart goes back). FBI.GOV

    Gun ownership has been increasing, 30% since Obama. News

    Population has been increasing too, “population increase of 0.75%.” wikipedia

    With the huge increase in ownership and the decrease in murders why are they going for the guns? All the facts lead one to believe gun ownership decreases gun violence. Another kid got suspended this week for making a gun gesture with his hand.

    Shit is just fucking weird!

    • Let’s put it this way Dom, if the citizens of the Ukraine had unfettered access to firearms, the “protests” would have been over with post haste. I think we all know why the PTB want to take private firearms: they don’t like the prospect of facing the anger of the unwashed masses and potentially Madame Guillotine’s embrace.

  6. Eric. I’m not so sure about people surrendering their own protection. Yes some people will turn in old rifles/pistols to appear they are in compliance but most know its a sham. In NYC they have a gun buyback and surrender program. With seven million citizens living in NYC guess how many turned in their hardware over the past twenty years? ……almost none. It was a joke as it is in Connecticut. Laws will never get people to surrender their hardware….only violence on the states part will.

    • JoePA – I was talking to a friend of mine from Mexico. He said gun ownership is tightly restricted…officially. But he also said when he was growing up, a lot of people he knew had guns; they just kept them out of sight. From what I gather from our little talk, it’s a similar situation south of the border to the one up here in “them thar hills” if someone breaks in on you or threatens you. You just give ’em the 3S treatment: shoot, shovel an’ shut up. No need for the authorities to be involved. 😉

      • Well, Boothe, that might work unless the invaders _were_ “the authorities.” They tend to come in large gangs. People who must hide their guns do not derive much real benefit from them anyway. Without careful and frequent practice, they can’t really gain any proficiency or confidence in the use of their tools.

        • Quite right MamaLiberty. I wasn’t suggesting that situation is a good thing, just an observation that even where guns are banned or restricted the people won’t turn them all in. They just have to be more careful and hence less proficient with them as you stated. Even back in the days when bootleggers and moonshiners were shooting revenuers, they didn’t fare too well when the G-Men showed up en masse. Picking bad guys off one or two at a time discretely is doable; engaging your local SWAT team is suicide. Common sense has to come into play based on the given situation.

          It seems to me that the goal of “the authorities” is to disarm as many as possible and to leave those they can’t disarm in a position where it’s very difficult to practice with their “contraband” arms. That’s why I think it’s important to exercise the right frequently by practicing on a regular basis, teaching others marksmanship and doing everything we can to make gun ownership mainstream and normal once again. Bending over backwards to compromise with the gun grabbers was a major mistake and has already taken us way too far down the slippery slope of prohibition all in the name of public safety.

          Fortunately it seems a lot of folks are seeing through this facade and are (still) buying guns and ammo at a brisk pace. We have states passing laws to prohibit federal interference with gun rights now. This has to worry the PTB and I’m glad to see it. The next step is to eliminate state gun restrictions and let everyone that wants to carry without permits (like Vermont). We’d see violent crime plummet, especially in places like New York, Detroit and Chicago. We’d need fewer cops, courts, lawyers and jails and that, I believe is one key reason the legal parasite class is so opposed to gun rights.

          • Boothe, how much violent crime could someone who was carrying have prevented in your area? None around here! You want millions of people to carry where there was no crime to prevent? We hear a lot more often where a gun kills some innocent person within their own home or someone shooting another person for throwing popcorn at them than we hear about a preventable crime that could or did take place.

            Tell me boothe, what would have happened in the movie theater with the popcorn incident if everyone was carrying? Would there be 30 people dead instead of one?

          • Clover – As I pointed out before (I presume you are referring to the ex-cop that shot the unarmed civilian in Florida), if Mr. Ex-Cop-SWAT-Team-Leader had any reasonable belief that his popcorn wielding victim would have shot back, he’d have kept his weapon holstered. The reason we’ve seen a net decrease in violent crime here in the United States is because of the proliferation of firearms: criminals fear armed victims. When was the last time you heard about a mass shooting in a gun store, a shooting range or a police station?

            The reason violent crime is and has been on the rise in the UK, and more particularly gun crime, is due to the fact that the criminals are (A) fully aware that the civilian populace is at a severe tactical disadvantage, and (B) they roundly ignore the gun (and now, knife) laws. Explain this:

            Clover, look at Chicago, New York, Detroit, LA; all places with strict gun control laws and incredibly high violent crime rates. Compare them to that bastion of right wing conservatism Vermont (yeah, right), where anyone can carry a gun any way they want and they have a remarkably low violent crime rate. Explain that.

            I actually had a gun “incident” in my home that prevented a violent crime. In 1987 a serial rapist walked into my house naked, chased my wife into the bedroom and she shot him. He ran away, but didn’t get far naked with a bullet hole all the way through him. He was there waiting for them when the police arrived 50 minutes later. Imagine that, no cop when you need one. Because of a handgun, he did not complete that crime.

            Another time I was carrying openly when approached at an ATM by two young men in Hampton, Virginia who were crowding me, seemingly intent on watching me enter my PIN. When I turned around to question them, they saw the gun, backed off and asked if I was a cop. I explained to them that I wasn’t and that meant I wouldn’t have to do any paperwork if I shot them. I never drew the weapon or brandished it in any way. They got in their car and left. Problem solved. Do you think they were there to invite me out to coffee and a friendly chat?

            Wake up Clover. Here in the real world there actually are bad people intent on taking what we have and hurting us…and not all of them work for the government like you. If they encounter a hard target, the majority of times they will move on and look for a soft target. If they find a soft target, you will see the victim’s family being interviewed on the news and they become part of that year’s crime statistics. You do what you want Clover. No one’s forcing you to carry a gun. But for me and mine, we shall remain hard targets.

          • If you guys haven’t already, I highly recommend reading Matthew Bracken’s Enemies Foreign and Domestic Trilogy.

            It is absolutely prescient; I thought it had been written in the last two or three years…but the first one was published over a decade ago!

            He’s ex-special forces and buries a number of very useful tactical and strategic hints throughout the books.

            But at base, they’re a rip-roaring read. They’ve destroyed my sleep patterns for the last two weeks.

            The first one addresses almost exactly what’s happening in Connecticut and New York.

          • methylamine, thanks for the review. I have seen those but had no input except for online reviews made to sell them. I’ll try to read them soon. On another note,(I guess I’m full of those), I was reminded of “A Walk on the Wild Side” today and had to revisit it. I had an old paperback copy someone had either given me or I found in the early seventies when I was trucking. It literally came apart on me before I finished. I was so hooked on it I tried several used bookstores in a couple of counties. A new used bookstore in Abilene, Tx. back in that time, didn’t have it but the owner said he could order it for me. I was more than ready for his call to say it had come in and I drove 120 miles to get it. Don’t know i’ve ever spent more to get one work of fiction but it was well worth it.

  7. Originally, I was going to try to modify this to meet today’s details.
    I have decided the original is better than my paltry attempts would turn out.

    St. John’s Church, Richmond, Virginia
    March 23, 1775.
    MR. PRESIDENT: No man thinks more highly than I do of the patriotism, as well as abilities, of the very worthy gentlemen who have just addressed the House. But different men often see the same subject in different lights; and, therefore, I hope it will not be thought disrespectful to those gentlemen if, entertaining as I do, opinions of a character very opposite to theirs, I shall speak forth my sentiments freely, and without reserve. This is no time for ceremony. The question before the House is one of awful moment to this country. For my own part, I consider it as nothing less than a question of freedom or slavery; and in proportion to the magnitude of the subject ought to be the freedom of the debate. It is only in this way that we can hope to arrive at truth, and fulfil the great responsibility which we hold to God and our country. Should I keep back my opinions at such a time, through fear of giving offence, I should consider myself as guilty of treason towards my country, and of an act of disloyalty toward the majesty of heaven, which I revere above all earthly kings.
    Mr. President, it is natural to man to indulge in the illusions of hope. We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth, and listen to the song of that siren till she transforms us into beasts. Is this the part of wise men, engaged in a great and arduous struggle for liberty? Are we disposed to be of the number of those who, having eyes, see not, and, having ears, hear not, the things which so nearly concern their temporal salvation? For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst, and to provide for it.
    I have but one lamp by which my feet are guided; and that is the lamp of experience. I know of no way of judging of the future but by the past. And judging by the past, I wish to know what there has been in the conduct of the British ministry for the last ten years, to justify those hopes with which gentlemen have been pleased to solace themselves, and the House? Is it that insidious smile with which our petition has been lately received? Trust it not, sir; it will prove a snare to your feet. Suffer not yourselves to be betrayed with a kiss. Ask yourselves how this gracious reception of our petition comports with these war-like preparations which cover our waters and darken our land. Are fleets and armies necessary to a work of love and reconciliation? Have we shown ourselves so unwilling to be reconciled, that force must be called in to win back our love? Let us not deceive ourselves, sir. These are the implements of war and subjugation; the last arguments to which kings resort. I ask, gentlemen, sir, what means this martial array, if its purpose be not to force us to submission? Can gentlemen assign any other possible motive for it? Has Great Britain any enemy, in this quarter of the world, to call for all this accumulation of navies and armies? No, sir, she has none. They are meant for us; they can be meant for no other. They are sent over to bind and rivet upon us those chains which the British ministry have been so long forging. And what have we to oppose to them? Shall we try argument? Sir, we have been trying that for the last ten years. Have we anything new to offer upon the subject? Nothing. We have held the subject up in every light of which it is capable; but it has been all in vain. Shall we resort to entreaty and humble supplication? What terms shall we find which have not been already exhausted? Let us not, I beseech you, sir, deceive ourselves. Sir, we have done everything that could be done, to avert the storm which is now coming on. We have petitioned; we have remonstrated; we have supplicated; we have prostrated ourselves before the throne, and have implored its interposition to arrest the tyrannical hands of the ministry and Parliament. Our petitions have been slighted; our remonstrances have produced additional violence and insult; our supplications have been disregarded; and we have been spurned, with contempt, from the foot of the throne. In vain, after these things, may we indulge the fond hope of peace and reconciliation. There is no longer any room for hope. If we wish to be free if we mean to preserve inviolate those inestimable privileges for which we have been so long contending if we mean not basely to abandon the noble struggle in which we have been so long engaged, and which we have pledged ourselves never to abandon until the glorious object of our contest shall be obtained, we must fight! I repeat it, sir, we must fight! An appeal to arms and to the God of Hosts is all that is left us!
    They tell us, sir, that we are weak; unable to cope with so formidable an adversary. But when shall we be stronger? Will it be the next week, or the next year? Will it be when we are totally disarmed, and when a British guard shall be stationed in every house? Shall we gather strength by irresolution and inaction? Shall we acquire the means of effectual resistance, by lying supinely on our backs, and hugging the delusive phantom of hope, until our enemies shall have bound us hand and foot? Sir, we are not weak if we make a proper use of those means which the God of nature hath placed in our power. Three millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us. Besides, sir, we shall not fight our battles alone. There is a just God who presides over the destinies of nations; and who will raise up friends to fight our battles for us. The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave. Besides, sir, we have no election. If we were base enough to desire it, it is now too late to retire from the contest. There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! Our chains are forged! Their clanking may be heard on the plains of Boston! The war is inevitable and let it come! I repeat it, sir, let it come.
    It is in vain, sir, to extenuate the matter. Gentlemen may cry, Peace, Peace but there is no peace. The war is actually begun! The next gale that sweeps from the north will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms! Our brethren are already in the field! Why stand we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!

  8. First they had to train and educate the young ones into compliance after the 50’s. And brother have the progressives been successful at animal obedience training. So what is to stop them marching forward with “guns are bad” if possessed by the prols, while bombing and M-16’ing the rest of the world into “democratic” corporate/ banker submission.

    Personally I try to keep a $1,000.00 bail/ slush fund for the day when my errant ways may be discovered by the Lidar gun.

    • Don’t think so, Garysco. The “progressives” and controllers have certainly tried hard to brainwash everyone, but events all over the world indicate that it’s starting to backfire nicely. A few years ago, I would not have given any credit to the idea that THAT MANY people in Connecticut, on the east coast for pity sake, would even dream of defying their would-be masters.

      That’s a LOT of guns, and a lot of people who are thumbing their nose at this bogus “authority.” And it’s happening all over the country, even the world.

      What makes you think the controllers are so omnipotent? What makes you think they can gather the resources to actually enforce anything at gunpoint on this scale? They can’t, especially with the economy crashing. The ONLY thing they’ve ever had was the voluntary compliance of the victims… and they are losing ground on that score almost everywhere. The people of Detroit, for pity sake, are arming themselves and shooting the bad guys. If it can happen in Detroit and even Chicago, tomorrow the world. 🙂

      I find the situation in Connecticut very encouraging. You should too.

      Oh, and I never wear the “seat belt” here, unless I want to. Never been stopped… can’t be stopped just for that here anyway – but it doesn’t much matter. Nobody here is stopped for much of anything. Not enough “stoppers” to go around. 🙂

        • I think it helps to have the perspective of 67 years, watching all of this go on. And having strong, adventurous, stubborn, risk taking children didn’t hurt… 🙂

          Seems to me that far too many “freedom folk” get blind sided by the all or nothing thinking. I hear over and over the silly “sheeple” stuff, lumping everyone but pretty much themselves together as hopeless and too stupid to breathe. In my younger days, I tended to think some of that too… but spending 30 years dealing with patients from absolutely every walk of life, age, race, creed, and economic situation imaginable… eventually changed my mind.

          Most people simply want to live their lives unmolested, doing their own thing, and will do incredibly strange things to compromise or hide in order to do that. The small percentage of those who actually LUST to control others take advantage of that… for as long as they can.

          It’s the sincere do-gooders, those who torment others “for their own good”… those are the most dangerous of our foes. And we defeat them simply by not cooperating. There are too few of them to force anything in the long run.

          What folks are starting to understand, in ever greater numbers, is that nobody has any legitimate authority to control their lives… and that’s been the missing ingredient for an awful long time. This thing is going to snowball – and I’m not saying at all there won’t be some violent responses from both sides.

          The “fat lady” is in the wings now, and warming up. Singing to commence pretty soon. 🙂

        • eric, as I’m sure you’re aware, SAF won a great court case recently that nullifies the non-Constitutional state rulings previously having to do with concealed carry. They announced today that the first 5,000 CC licenses have been sent out in Illinois. The SAF as well as the Illinois State patrol have both estimated a final initial count of between 300,000 and 400,000 CCL’s in that state as soon as they can be processed. SAF is working in Ct. too so it’s just a matter of time before illegal mandatory registration is reversed. I’m sure you’re also aware the top cop there has said they’ll start coming after non-registered guns in Ct. so that should be an interesting scenario to say the least. If nothing else people will emigrate to other locales as businesses have already done there. Tax base falls and you know what’s next. Yeeeeehaaawwww!!

        • Will it be broadcast on the 6:00 O’clock news?
          What do mean no pizza, gasoline, car repairs, burgers, milk and toilet paper? Ya, the owner got locked up for owning an unregistered .22 rifle.

        • Eric I back your right as a libertarian to not wear seat belts. Everyone else I think should have them on. Immediately after seat belt laws went into place for each state the traffic death rate went down a lot in that state. If you want libertarians to face the drastic increase in death and injury rate that goes with the lack of seat belt use then I say go for it.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here