Quote of the day—Pam Bergren

Today’s Courant says that there could be as many as 330,000 people with assault weapons who refused to register them according to the law. Then now is the time to increase the penalty and start rounding them up.

Pam Bergren
East Hartford
February 12, 2014
Prosecute Illegal Gun Owners
[Just so you know what they want done to you for exercising your specific enumerated right to keep and bear arms.

Ms. Bergren should be careful what she says. It may be used as evidence against her at her trial.—Joe]

16 thoughts on “Quote of the day—Pam Bergren

  1. Yet she won’t say squat about rounding up all the Illegal Aliens living in her state…

    • I’ll bet there are a whole lot more people dead or maimed in CT (as well as everywhere else) by illegals due to murder, DUI, etc than by previously law abiding owners of SBRs. I’ll also bet this twit knows that. The fascists are rather busy lately, taking their masks off. They have the green light from on high, and seem to be feeling froggy.

  2. sirs:

    does the dumb bitch have any notion of what is involved in “rounding up” 330,000 restive, and armed, souls? dumb as a fence post.

    john jay

    • Faith in government knows no bounds. If government says it will be, it will be, and that’s that. And do you see what an intoxicating drug that can be?

      It’s part of what I call the “Pet Dragon Fantasy” (or syndrome). As the apex predator, your pet dragon has the power to intimidate, force, destroy or kill at will, and it is your loyal friend so it’ll never harm you. You can order it to kill this guy here or rob that guy over there, you’re never really responsible or accountable personally because your dragon takes care of those things, and you’re never in harm’s way yourself. A sense of “absolute power by proxy” can do strange things to a person’s mind, and it’s never good.

      • Lyle, that reminds me of the scene in the second Terminator movie when John (?) realizes he has his own personal Terminator.
        Sam

    • Pam, that’s so sad. You must experience a lot of disappointment in your life. I truly feel sorry for you and you have my most sincere condolences.

  3. “… Then now is the time to increase the penalty and start rounding them up.”

    Kind of like the Nazis did to the Jews?
    Kind of like the Turks did to the Armenians?

    I think just these two genocides that match the conditions for CT (registration and severe ownership penalties) should be enough to scare rational, thoughtful people (which she is not).

    Here’s my reply:
    1. I will not comply!
    2. Never Again!
    3. Molon Labe!

    • We’re edging closer and closer to the “line in the sand” which will not be rooftop voting, but the refusal of the states that you can probably guess when the Progressives finally get their pretext to get something through Congress.

  4. “The Bracken Anthology” has a good essay about this (“Dear Mr. Security Agent”). Connecticut is clearly over what he calls the “Yellow line” and very close to the “Red line”.

    As for voting — yes, but unfortunately gun owners often give their right to bear arms very little weight in choosing who to vote for. Ask yourself how many people vote for anti-gun candidates. Maybe because they are thought to be “the lesser evil”. Maybe because some pork they deliver seems more important.

    So long as people continue to do that, candidates won’t be paying the price. The solution is a “zero tolerance” approach to voting. Vote against the right to bear arms, even once, no matter WHAT excuse you come up with, no matter WHAT “good” things you voted for or helped deliver, and you’re not getting my vote. Even if the other guy may be “worse” — the penalty for voting against my rights is that you have, now and forever, forfeited my support.

    If 300k gun owners were to use this zero tolerance approach, the whole mess would stop within one or two election cycles. But so long as they continue to vote the incumbent in spite of his attacks on our rights, the attacks will continue.

  5. I suppose Pam is going to volunteer for roundup duty, eh?

    Also, one wonders how Pam is planning on figuring out who to round up? Did she forget that they don’t have a registry already?

    How was she planning on determining who’s door to go knock on?

    http://notboutthing.blogspot.com/2014/02/addendum-to-connecticut-post-below.html

    If she was to determine it, what power will she have to determine a crime has been committed? No search warrant would be issued on suspicion of possibly maybe owning a gun because he applied to buy one once.

    How does she reconcile the massive amout of people we’re talking about here? Connecticut doesn’t have prisons for all of these folks, even IF they emptied them all tomorrow.

    THe whole process is an excersize in state worship (they can do anything, can’t they?) that completely ignores the fact that her precious little law is defunct by default, because of population nullification. Laws only exist if the peole choose to follow them. Only an idiot gives an order that he knows will not be followed.

    http://notboutthing.blogspot.com/2014/02/connecticut-has-tiger-by-tail.html

  6. Have some 80% receivers made up with a duplicate SN… send them the 80% receiver, tell them you’re done, now leave me alone!

Comments are closed.