Wlll CT polie follow orders to confiscate guns from what looks to be a huge number of gun owners that refused to register?

If the order comes down from the elected officials there....Of course they will. End of story.

They'll follow them and I'd suspect a good many will turn them in once the officer is right there on their door step.

YES ...

Do you think they will take a stand that might cost them their job , healthcare ,retirement ?
In today's world right and wrong doesn't matter -it's material things and security.

I bet there ar officers that will knock on the door and say " no guns here" move on now. I suspect they will sell or move the guns to other states too. Talk is cheap but no way would I give up a 1200 dollar gun.

I bet there ar officers that will knock on the door and say " no guns here" move on now. I suspect they will sell or move the guns to other states too. Talk is cheap but no way would I give up a 1200 dollar gun.

YES

Almost to a man they will. Might be a few take a stand but it'll be darn few.

Or a 50 dollar gun

While they are trying to take our guns and fighting our on govt the others that hate us even more will be sneaking in the back door and kick our ass.

pretty much sums it all up. Just wait till the first one or two are killed while doing that.

http://beforeitsnews.com/alternativ...titutional-gun-control-laws-2914528.html

Most of the State Troopers at the Barracks that cover were I live don't like this stuff anymore than I do. So far the State has not enforced the new laws- they been challenged to do so. The numbers of non compliance with the new laws have got the politicians blinking. A legislator seat that has been Democrat for the last 40 years was won in a special election by a pro 2nd Republican. Connecticut is a Blue Democrat State and this is a real shock to them up in Hartford. The out come is nothing like what they thought it would be when they passed this junk in the first place. The last thing in the world I would want to see is blood shed- it would be a real mess, We will run thru the courts and come November fire a whole bunch and maybe repeal this stuff next year. We live in some interesting times.

68% of current CN officers are on the list.

Who they going to get to arrest all the current officers?

Those who refuse will be replaced.

+1

Not to mention perhaps being made examples of as well.

That was a joke.

Talk is cheap. They have no problems following orders and doing unconstitutional roadblock stop and searches.

No dictator in history has had trouble finding their henchmen.

I can't wait to get the order to kick in your door

Exhibit A, Henchman #1

We've seen how this works.

Cops posture that they are with us and the Constitution and complain about restriction, until they get some special law enforcement only exemption naming them a special privileged class. They, then, lace up their jackboots, slip on their vest, and enforce tyranny.

The State (Politicians) know that as of right now they DO NOT have the backing of the Majority of the state police. Hence why no action has been taken. Of course all the "all knowing armchair quarterbacks" on here know that they (state police) will just follow orders.

There are a few in the state police that will follow orders to either ensure their career or to enhance it. The reality is that they are a minority and the state knows that.

I'm sure they had the foresight to consider that before they passed the law also. Democrats rely heavily on the UN for fatherly advice, don't they?

It will start with a few doing it then the rest will have their jobs threatened for not doing it. Remember they were only following orders. Lets hope some of them get shot at the first house!

I like that John Cinque fellow.

Yep.

Actually NO! They (Democrats) thought that all would just comply. When they got the slap in the face they were shocked. They then scrambled to see what they could do. This is were the letter came into play. At that time they were ready to move forward. Once it reached the State Police and the brass there informed them (State Dems), that this will be a very hard sell to rank and file officers. The state backed down. Right now the State doesn't know what to do. They are hoping for leadership from the Federal government, but so far have not received it. I was told by someone in the know that part of the plan for Obama to visit CT last week was disguised as minimum wage campaign but to talk about pushing forward the confiscation.

As for police folding on it. Highly unlikely. The first officer fired or relieved of duty will start the law suit. Once the law suit is started it only gets stronger with numbers. The State knows that and is very fearful of that. Hence why this so far has been handled with white gloves.

I can tell you what will put more pressure on LEO's whether they like it or not and that is judges issuing search warrants.

I would like to believe that police will not follow unconstitutional orders, but my life experience and history shows that police have not been staunch defenders of personal liberty nor upholders of constitutional rights.

Hence why I said what are they going to do when judges start issuing search warrants. Do you think they will refuse them too ?

A judge's search warrant is an authorization to search, not an order to search.

I take little solace in hearing that a CT police officer won't comply with an order to confiscate from the same people who said there's no way any state could ever pass a law requiring registration.

Not pointed at anyone in particular but when the state's already 1/2 down the slope, I just don't believe they're gonna stop.

The authorization would follow a request from someone on the enforcement side. There is no way it wouldn't be executed.

Agreed. Just clarifying the point. No doubt the order may be given, and if given, it will be executed by the police.

Those pesky unions might come in handy after all, darn'd double edge swords

Search warrants are court orders not suggestions Hawk.


Search Warrant

A court order authorizing the examination of a place for the purpose of discovering contraband, stolen property, or evidence of guilt to be used in the prosecution of a criminal action.

Look up the word authorizing and get back to me.

It is an authorization to search, not an order to do so. One can have authorization to do something and not have to do it at all (i.e., I may have authorization to hunt a certain property, but whether I choose to do so is my decision).

For the court to order a warrant it would have to be initiated by the state or police. Right now they are not. The reason they are not I already outlined.

If we had more gun owners fight with their heads rather then jump to video game dreams, we would all be a lot better off and ahead of the game.

The video game dreamers aren't NRA members.

Seems to me that LEO'S have quite a bit of discretion in executing warrants already. Lots of dead-beat-dads and mom warrants sitting in drawers.

Outstanding warrants would make driving around far more exciting. Better not get pulled over for speeding...

Authorizing because a judge has been given "evidence" that a crime or criminal activity is/has taken place.

Yes. Authorizing for that reason. Not mandating that it be served. Whoever asked for the warrant can then choose to let it sit in a drawer, or tear it up, if he changes his mind about it.

...can you give me some examples of where the courts have given the police the sole authority to not execute a search warrant because they didn't feel like it as it would relate to this specific topic being discussed ? Remember, the type and origin of this search warrant not coming from police activity, but from the state.

RDFinn you are putting the cart in front of the horse. So far the State nor the Police have initiated any warrants. They have not done so because they know the ramifications of doing so.

However you are correct if a warrant were issued it would be executed by whoever they could muster up to do so.

Yes, I was stating a couple of pages back what could possibly happen if say LEO's went to a home where the resident refused the officers inquiry or not to their satisfaction and what could happen if the LEO's of the state grew balls and told the "state" to GFY. There is no F'ing way a LEO is going to tell the AG/Prosecutor etc etc to go [bleep] themselves after being handed a search warrant to search XYZ homes.

The search warrant is still a choice, not an order. Will CT find enough troopers to serve and execute those and confiscation warrants? Sure they will. Some won't, perhaps, but only some and not all. It would take all to have the state completely balk, and there will be enough to follow orders no matter what the orders happen to be. History proves that painfully true.

I'm just trying to explain to you that the warrant is an authorization of action by the police, not a mandate of action. This is very basic material, and doesn't require specific examples. A hypothetical example would be a cop asks for a search warrant, receives it, and then gets solid evidence that the subject of the warrant was not involved in the crime he was investigating, so it doesn't get executed.

This. Exactly right.

Yes, that happens often, but that doesn't answer my question. Go back and read my specific example as it relates to this topic. Heck, I can [bleep] can a warrant easily by saying any number of things, but that's not what we are talking about here Hawk. Remember, cops did not initiate this order, the state did.

We must be talking past each other, then.

RDFinn is saying that you are comparing a warrant initiated by a police department, when he is saying the department isn't initiating it, the State is. To this he is 100% correct that the issued warrant will be executed by whoever the State Police can muster to do so.

I should have said "I believe what RDFinn is saying".

......and it will not be up for a vote........

Correct

It is exactly what I was saying. Thank you sir.

But we are not at that point yet. Because they (State Dem's) do not have faith in the ability to muster said State Troopers. Nor are they prepared for the blood shed.

Nor are they ready for a court challenge with the first confiscation attempt that will results in a plea to the court for an immediate temporary injunction of the the law and/or confiscations pending full judicial review.

TRH if and once the state has issued the warrant they will execute it with whatever means they have. They will not have the power to say no. Even if they did the state would take the next action. Which in my opinion would be National Guard.

Agreed. God forbid an LEO gets shot or worst, killed during one of these actions. There will be a thousand new " police execution" video's posted at the Campfire as they go armed to the teeth on every subsequent "search".

Yep. Any such situation would not end well for all parties involved, and might just get far worse than most of us would ever really want in the first place.

You are correct too. But most on here seem to want to skip the proper processes and jump to the combatant processes.

Idle minds/hands are the Devil's playground.

The thought of being shipped off to the gulag along with the recent made criminals after being conditioned into believing that the average citizen is the enemy that making a decision on their part is a moot point. Granted a few, and very few at that, may reject but not to make a difference. Knowing the few LEO's that I do, they all seem to have low self constitutions and have ate up the modern LEO agenda whole bowl.

However in the CT case I will be somewhat surprised if confiscation happens but in these times stupidity rules.

That's not a point of disagreement, since I concur completely on that point. If you look back at the post that started this little back and forth, though, you will see that he stated that the warrant itself was an order to the police to act, when it is not. It's an authorization to act. If he didn't mean to say that the warrant itself was an order for the police to act, he needs to modify his post.

Hopefully it will never get to the point of confiscation in Conn or anywhere else. But if it does, it is going to be real interesting to see how trashed the homes get if the LEO's don't see what it is they are looking for and are told that there is nothing on the premises. How far will they be willing to go in their search?

If I were a Leo in Ct I believe I'd be using a few sick days if they wanted me to confiscate citizens weapons and I'd be telling my bosses to FOAD or GFY.

I'm not so sure the police will be so tough. Remember when Hurrucane Katrina came to New Orleans. They ran home to protect their own family. To hell with their jobs. The police or state troopers know very well they are legally owned firearms. I have a philosphy that people that are being violated are more powerfull than scum that obey orders of dictatorship. Maybe you all think I'm nuts, maybe you're right. But there is nothing that intimidates a dictator more than armed civilians that are willing to stand up. Conn. is finding this out. They are not just caught in a situation , they are facing the real fact that if the gun owners unite and fight, there could be absolute hell to pay. Forget the few that will be arrested or shot. The disdain for the law may go wild. Not just from gun owners neither. The law can't afford this type of direspect from the people. People might burn down buildings. Who is to really say people don't know where the state troopers houses are, their kids, wives, parents ECT. These officers that carry out armed confiscations could see retaliation they didn't expect. This Ahole that can't wait to kick down the first door should give it a second thought. I don't like to talk like this at all, but I think I would go off in a rampage of revenge or hate for the law if they took even one gun from me. I don't know if I could control myself knowing if they took my guns , all my other freedoms are gone then too.

You bet your bippy they'll follow orders: they want their pension.

Actually his chief and Mayor should be seeking legal council to fire him.

They will get their pension and a lot more standing down and filing law suits. Most if not all of them know it too.

Sure. Very few are willing to give up a secure job.

What will the basis of the law suit be?

TRH I am not a lawyer.

I would venture to guess something to do with being directed to carry out an unlawful order. That would be a starting point if nothing else.

They would not be giving up a secure job. Either suspended with or without pay. Doesn't matter either way as they will be compensated for it in the end.

Those no good unions.

All this assumes of course that the order given is deemed to be unlawful.

I bet more are less willing to give up their life.

Sure the union will be involved, but it would be the same without the union.

It sure seems the State isn't willing to take that chance either way right now.

This was done in satire and is not true.
CT Law Enforcement are not on the list as they are exempt from registering "THEIR" firearms.

The 250 CT Peace Officers that have "signed" refusal to confiscate is also a Hoax.
Many of the web site with this info have been deleted.

Read it here.

http://ccdl.us/blog/2014/03/09/fake-news/

Yes Sir, I would retire/quit before getting killed over a clearly illegal law...

Now that would be a real gas to see unfold in public.

If true - that's some mighty good news there.

NOt all of 'em.. A bunch went door to door collecting firearms. Remember the video of a few LEOs tackling the elderly woman who just wanted to stay and defend her own property with a revolver?? THAT is what you might see in CT.. I hear ya.. Which is EXACTLY what the idiots in Hartford need to understand and believe in..

Wasn't NG troops that confiscated too?

------------------------------------------------------------

Right on !!

Someone has to initiate the search warrant application to convince a judge to issue a SW based on probable cause. Even if issued, they still have the discretion to not serve it.

cop with no problem kicking doors in identified and on paid leave.
http://www.storyleak.com/conn-cop-gun-owning-veteran-wait-get-order-kick-door/

The "order" part of this is directed toward the suspect to comply with it while the police conduct their search. Not toward the police to serve it.

So, is it possible that this stuff with warrants varies State by State?

No.

What did cops do after Katrina when they were told to confiscate guns?

What are they doing in California as we discuss this?

What did they do in Nazi Germany?

They did what they were told to do.

Connecticut cops will do the same.

I agree.

http://freedomoutpost.com/2014/03/c...ration-is-all-about/#0ticWZqHK8ChL00G.99

Its not cops, it's people, which is what cops are, PEOPLE, and people do what people do.

And there ya go...

There WILL be some (in this case, the word 'rogue' could apply) LEOs that WILL follow unconstitutional orders issued by a state gov't. IMHO, those exact LEOs are putting themselves in a huge puddle of chit if/when those orders come down.

I think Officer Peterson needs a quick entry into 'sensitivity training'.. And then gets FIRED..

Talk is cheap.

They don't need agreement from a majority of officers. All they need is to "form a task force" for the special firearms and Licensing unit and ask for volunteers. Maybe offer overtime or some other extra benefit and they will easily attract a enough officers for their collection unit.

Will they be able to collect from 400K people.. of course not but they can start "small" a dozen a week. Probably choose targets that will make good press and when they find a weapon charge them with the felony.