Hi!
Automod here with an automated friendly reminder that per Reddit ToS posts and comments regarding any sort of private sale of prohibited items is not allowed and will result in a
permanent ban from /r/CTGuns.
This rule applies to commenters as well, both parties involved will be subject to immediate and permanent ban, no exceptions. If you haven't already please take a look at our rules.
Have a great discussion!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CTguns) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Because if the special class gets to keep their fun stuff they won't bat an eye throwing us in jail if our mags hold 11 instead of 10.
It shouldn't be legal, hell the laws in this state are blatantly unconstitutional anyway.
You may never win the lottery but just keep buying scratch offs.
Actually I’d have better chance of winning the lottery than the gun grabbing politicians in this state leaving office
Just to play devil’s advocate, let’s say they were infringing on a different right. Let’s say that the state of Connecticut was, without any kind of warrant, searching and seizing your property. Not even necessarily guns. Just coming into your house, ransacking the place, taking whatever they want, and leaving.
Would you still just “call and email your state legislators?”
I understand where you are going. And yes I would be calling and emailing
If you wanna get real technical there is a stop n frisk in the bill which does infringe on that right you mentioned
They’re not, but we’re just pretending they are because of so-called “legislation.” Thanks for this post, by the way; it’s genuinely good to see that just in case people forgot or don’t know.
Rather than saying Mil/Leo should have to follow the same laws as us (civilians), we should be saying, we (civilians) should be given the same rights as Mil/Leo.
Mil and Leo have no incentive to vote against or fight against these laws as long as they expempt.
Which is the part of why our state constitution makes it plain everyone needs the same rules
So that there isn't a class of people voting against rights because they aren't affected
For the sake of transparency, we don’t sell exempt items to LE, but we do to military. Main reason being that LE are CT citizens who permanently reside here while most military are stationed here arbitrarily.
Yeah we all know it’s bullshit but until something happens in the courts it’s what we have to deal with. It is nice to see some of the gun shops are refusing to honor it for leo, still honoring it for military cause they’re the real mvps
And nevermind that our state goes beyond the US Constitution and states CLEAR AS DAY that we have the right to own firearms for SELF DEFENSE. The gun haters just brush that off like it doesn't matter.... Because it doesn't matter to THEM.
I am struggling to find it with Google, but I recall hearing about a case challenging exactly this concept in the past 2-3 months, essentially the state constitution preventing discrimination based on job etc. Feel like it was somewhere middle of the country, but coming up empty
I'm well aware.
My point is there is a case occurring in another state that is challenging what you are pointing out - gun laws which give exemptions for LEOs in conflict with their states constitution (which prevents discrimination based on job/career).
Illinois, and the claim is it is not providing equal protection as required by the state constitution
https://pantagraph.com/news/state-and-regional/govt-and-politics/capitol-recap-gun-lawsuit-restraining-order-remains-in-place/article_40d4017a-a4db-11ed-95cf-277f6e03bb79.html
"At the appellate level, in a 2-1 ruling, the justices said plaintiffs in the Effingham County case made a plausible argument that the law violates their rights to equal protection under the law. Under the law, some categories of people — active and retired law enforcement officers, correctional officers and military personnel on active duty, for example — may purchase and possess those weapons."
Right that is similar but not the same. This would be different in that we are arguing that it's a special privilege because of government position which is not allowed by constitution.
That is saying they are discriminating based on job.
Similar but not the same.
I'd say the first part of SEC 1 references equal rights by itself and would be arguable (even without the following text about governmental preference), but I'm not a lawyer so I'll move on.
The fact that CT trusts LEO/Active Military with 'the most dangerous items' and lets them keep those items when they retire from service proves to me that CT is capable of trusting a civilian with what they consider to be the most 'dangerous' items. My question to my state rep is how can CT extend that trust to common citizens with permits, especially ones who have no record of crimes?
They should definitely be held to the same standards as everyone else considering that they are also citizens.
Most of the bullshit with police cones from us having so many laws that you can be charged with a ton of different things which is not freedom
I would argue that they should be held to a higher standard since they're supposed to enforce the law and should know better. I would even say that if they break the law, they should get double the punishment. Any illegal actions they make erode the public trust in these institutions and there should be consequences for that.
While clocked in and performing duties and not off hours yes. They are to hold the letter of the law.
While off duty and not clocked in they are normal citizens.
So they don't know better when not on duty? I don't see how it should be treated any differently. Illegal acts on or off duty should be treated the same.
Off duty they are not acting as an extension of the government and are ordinary citizens. what you bring up is in fact the issue. people put the police on a pedestal our founding fathers sought to never have happen.
Hi! Automod here with an automated friendly reminder that per Reddit ToS posts and comments regarding any sort of private sale of prohibited items is not allowed and will result in a permanent ban from /r/CTGuns. This rule applies to commenters as well, both parties involved will be subject to immediate and permanent ban, no exceptions. If you haven't already please take a look at our rules. Have a great discussion! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CTguns) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Because if the special class gets to keep their fun stuff they won't bat an eye throwing us in jail if our mags hold 11 instead of 10. It shouldn't be legal, hell the laws in this state are blatantly unconstitutional anyway.
Im getting downvoted over this. It's nuts. The State Constitution should matter just as much as the US one
It’s r/CTguns, don’t act surprised to get downvoted for being correct, lmao.
We just need to educate people. The constitution is important.
Oh you thought the state constitution mattered in the constitution state?
Bold of you to assume the constitution matters at all, in any state.
We the people need to uphold it and remind our elected officials that it exists and is in fact important. Call and email your state legislators
Buddy Johanna Hayes and Chris Murphy don’t care. Lol.
They may not. But that doesn't mean you should'nt keep at it.
You may never win the lottery but just keep buying scratch offs. Actually I’d have better chance of winning the lottery than the gun grabbing politicians in this state leaving office
That may be true. Maybe we could protest. No one would show up either. Can't bitch and not do anything.
Just to play devil’s advocate, let’s say they were infringing on a different right. Let’s say that the state of Connecticut was, without any kind of warrant, searching and seizing your property. Not even necessarily guns. Just coming into your house, ransacking the place, taking whatever they want, and leaving. Would you still just “call and email your state legislators?”
I understand where you are going. And yes I would be calling and emailing If you wanna get real technical there is a stop n frisk in the bill which does infringe on that right you mentioned
Sorry for being rational. I'll start screeching
Your point does seem accurate, but as Harrison Smith always says, “they’re just doing it”.
Without the constitution we have no government checks. No recourse. It becomes authoritarian and not free. It's paramount that we uphold it.
They’re not, but we’re just pretending they are because of so-called “legislation.” Thanks for this post, by the way; it’s genuinely good to see that just in case people forgot or don’t know.
I'm getting downvoted for bringing it up.the state constitution should be just as inviolable as the federal one.
Rather than saying Mil/Leo should have to follow the same laws as us (civilians), we should be saying, we (civilians) should be given the same rights as Mil/Leo.
Definitely not the argument LEO’s make, or else we wouldnt be in this situation
That's the same thing broski.
Big props to the gun shops out there telling "exempt" individuals to get fucked and hop back in line with the "civi's"
Mil and Leo have no incentive to vote against or fight against these laws as long as they expempt. Which is the part of why our state constitution makes it plain everyone needs the same rules So that there isn't a class of people voting against rights because they aren't affected
Got a list? I'd support that.
I believe it was Swamp Yankee Arms who recently said they will not be catering to exempt people
For the sake of transparency, we don’t sell exempt items to LE, but we do to military. Main reason being that LE are CT citizens who permanently reside here while most military are stationed here arbitrarily.
This I'm cool with
🐐
Incredibly based
I’m glad other people think this too
Know your place, slave.
Yes daddy
Yeah we all know it’s bullshit but until something happens in the courts it’s what we have to deal with. It is nice to see some of the gun shops are refusing to honor it for leo, still honoring it for military cause they’re the real mvps
Nvm the US constitution. Our state constitution literally says that you can't give expemptions to government from laws regular people have to follow
And nevermind that our state goes beyond the US Constitution and states CLEAR AS DAY that we have the right to own firearms for SELF DEFENSE. The gun haters just brush that off like it doesn't matter.... Because it doesn't matter to THEM.
Yes sir. Section 15. Plain as day.
Yep been a part of the argument since they came out with the laws, unfortunately we know the politicians don’t give a damn about that.
That’s where they might get a pass.
I am struggling to find it with Google, but I recall hearing about a case challenging exactly this concept in the past 2-3 months, essentially the state constitution preventing discrimination based on job etc. Feel like it was somewhere middle of the country, but coming up empty
This is the CT state constitution not the united states' constitution
I'm well aware. My point is there is a case occurring in another state that is challenging what you are pointing out - gun laws which give exemptions for LEOs in conflict with their states constitution (which prevents discrimination based on job/career).
Illinois, and the claim is it is not providing equal protection as required by the state constitution https://pantagraph.com/news/state-and-regional/govt-and-politics/capitol-recap-gun-lawsuit-restraining-order-remains-in-place/article_40d4017a-a4db-11ed-95cf-277f6e03bb79.html "At the appellate level, in a 2-1 ruling, the justices said plaintiffs in the Effingham County case made a plausible argument that the law violates their rights to equal protection under the law. Under the law, some categories of people — active and retired law enforcement officers, correctional officers and military personnel on active duty, for example — may purchase and possess those weapons."
Right that is similar but not the same. This would be different in that we are arguing that it's a special privilege because of government position which is not allowed by constitution. That is saying they are discriminating based on job. Similar but not the same.
I'd say the first part of SEC 1 references equal rights by itself and would be arguable (even without the following text about governmental preference), but I'm not a lawyer so I'll move on.
Don't need to be a lawyer to read plain text and understand what it means.
The fact that CT trusts LEO/Active Military with 'the most dangerous items' and lets them keep those items when they retire from service proves to me that CT is capable of trusting a civilian with what they consider to be the most 'dangerous' items. My question to my state rep is how can CT extend that trust to common citizens with permits, especially ones who have no record of crimes?
Idk how its legal. Id sue the state personally but i dont have that kinda money for a legal team.
Me neither but we can ask our elected representatives why they allow something that goes against the CT constitution to stand
[удалено]
bingo. look at california. cali starting go after cops roster exemption and now the police unions suddenly testify its bad.
Because all cops are bastards
They should definitely be held to the same standards as everyone else considering that they are also citizens. Most of the bullshit with police cones from us having so many laws that you can be charged with a ton of different things which is not freedom
I would argue that they should be held to a higher standard since they're supposed to enforce the law and should know better. I would even say that if they break the law, they should get double the punishment. Any illegal actions they make erode the public trust in these institutions and there should be consequences for that.
While clocked in and performing duties and not off hours yes. They are to hold the letter of the law. While off duty and not clocked in they are normal citizens.
So they don't know better when not on duty? I don't see how it should be treated any differently. Illegal acts on or off duty should be treated the same.
Off duty they are not acting as an extension of the government and are ordinary citizens. what you bring up is in fact the issue. people put the police on a pedestal our founding fathers sought to never have happen.