Friday, October 31, 2014

The Viscount of Connecticut helpfully suggests banning standard capacity magazines while Malloy lets slip why they really want them banned.

David Codrea has this interesting post at War on Guns, along with video: Malloy v Visconti.
Visonti @4:27 -- "If they wanted to do something, they could have looked at the 30-round magazine that Adam Lanza used, and just targeted that."
Well, that sure sounds "no-compromise." How helpful.
And Malloy lets slip why they want to ban standard capacity magazines:
Malloy @6:22 -- "The reality of large capacity magazines is they do allow a madman, or a disturbed individual, or someone with malice, or for that matter, someone who wants to fight against the federal government for whatever reason..."
Also, David has some comments about the Tiger Talkers.
He quotes me here and rightly sneers:
Not to mention the inconvenience!
No matter, People who won't send an email, forward a link or even install Adblock will endure indeterminately-extended real world hardships and sacrifices to save us!
And they'll do it smugly, too, with an air of amused Que sera, sera superiority, although I would be curious to know what practical and moral leadership such people have shown at averting literal hell on earth, up close and personal. Cede the entire political arena to those who would rule all, without lifting a finger? Ingenious!
Meantime, I was forwarded this story from May of this year by a reader about Dave Ragozzine, who wrote "Anyone can have a blog, who cares what the dude says(?)"
Mr. Ragozzine, it seems, scared the politicos of Connecticut for saying this on-line:
“If you really want to save your state and country, you will become disobedient and do God’s work to save this nation,” Ragozzine allegedly wrote. “We need violence, we need to take out the scumbags. Locally, Malloy needs to be taken out. He must pay in blood for the crimes he has committed against this country, this state, and the constitution. Our founders and the first 111% wouldn’t have let him last one day in office.”
These were judged to be injudicious statements by the Connecticut State Police, the story continues:
Ragozzine, of 17 Mountain View Terrace, Apt. 3, in Winchester, was arraigned Friday in Superior Court on charges of inciting injury to a person or property, a Class C felony, and second-degree threatening.
Now, as the CSP is also investigating me for the quadruple sins of making a seditious speech, smuggling forbidden magazines, writing open letters, and posting the home addresses and phone numbers of the tyrants who passed the Intolerable Act, I am sympathetic to Mr. Ragozzine's situation. I will say that my own words and actions were chosen a bit more carefully than his, but that hasn't prevented the authorities from trying to figure out how to nail my ass to Red Mike "KGB" Lawlor's barn door. Thus, as I have skin in this Connecticut game, I would be curious to know what the disposition of Mr. Ragozzine's case was.


Anonymous said...

Once again super article . I love the term " Viscount of Connecticut" a phrase I must steal . I can't wait for powdered wigs to become vogue.
Speaking of stealing phrases I have just stolen one from Simon Black when he states "The criminalization of existence " by our very act of living and being we have become criminals within our own country . You are in my prayers Mike all the best.

Anonymous said...

People expressing extreme anger and disgust at the sordid state of affairs in America today might do well to understand that the tyrants who want to remove us of our rights to resist them via force are just as much opposed to our first amendment rights as any Chinese Internet censor commissar is, and do what those in that dark regime do- use a VPN or TOR.

I know its too late for some people, but its foolhardy for anyone to -not- at least consider such as an OPSEC measure before venting their spleen on the web.

After all, the enemy is listening, and will use any excuse to label you a dangerous threat and "legally" lay claim to the abrogation of your rights and your liberty.

You know, all while they label REAL acts of terrorism "workplace violence" as well as releasing REAL terrorists from gitmo to continue their evil careers.....

You must act as if the gov't that is supposed to serve you now considers you more of a threat then Nidal Hassan...... because it does.

Paul X said...

Now we just need a quote in here from Foley, to complete the picture.

Anonymous said...

Mike, Ragozzine's politically connected (D) parents made most of it go away and had the case sealed. Much like they did 5yrs ago when Ragozzine was arrested for impersonating a police officer. You see, he really wants nothing more to be a jackbooted thug himself, but as low as the IQ qualifications for that job is, Dave can't make the grade. Before his latest arrests, he had a video posted online asking for donations so he could outfit his car as a "texting enforcement unit" and pull people over to issue them citations warning of the dangers of not following the state's rules.

Anonymous said...

Don't discount the Viscount in 14!

Anonymous said...

Banning sheet metal boxes with springs is so idiotic I almost hope they continue this moronic behavior. It is so destined to fail and fail hard, why not watch and enjoy as they eff themselves as hard as possible? And the best part: they never learn, they keep doing it. I am so glad our opposition is so stupid!

Anonymous said...

Connecticut only seals adult criminal cases in two instances:

1. In mental health cases.
2. When the accused becomes a confidential informant.

When you consider that Ragozzine was previously busted for impersonating a cop, either instance is a good possibility.