Tag Archives: connecticut

Election 2014 – Update On CT State Rep Dan Carter

Posted on by
Reply

Surprise, surprise, State Rep Dan Carter actually responded personally to my request for more information (read here) before I considered donating to his reelection campaign. I found his answer to be on point and satisfactory, and I will, in my first ever contribution to a political campaign, donate a small sum to Republican rep Dan Carter’s reelection campaign. His donation page is here.

Dan Carter <repcarter@gmail.com>

12:46 PM (4 hours ago)

to me
Hi Lars!

Great reply!

The honest truth: you contacted me during the gun debate last year. I figure you are probably supportive of the way I voted, so I am looking for all the help I can muster.

The manner in which the law was passed last year was a complete disgrace to our system. The plan was to have a true bipartisan effort to look at legislation that could be passed quickly and benefit our state, while leaving more controversial issues to the normal committee process. Unfortunately, the process was quickly hijacked by members in the majority who had long standing agendas. This type of legislation should NEVER be put through the emergency certified process.

I am the only member of the Newtown delegation to vote against the legislation. I won’t lie and say I didn’t feel the pressure, since people I had genuinely respected wanted me to vote for the gun bill and the anti-gun groups in Newtown and Redding were all over me. But, I am serving in office to do my very best to make decisions that are best for my constituents by supporting good, well-thought-out policy. The bill passed last year has no chance of saving a life. It only creates a costly system that affects the people who actually follow our laws, versus those who would break them.

More importantly, I really do believe you should have the means of defending yourself, your family, and our country. I have spent my lifetime supporting the ideals that have made our nation great. I do not intend to stop that now.

As for begging for money, that is exactly what I am doing. I assure you it is necessary, as there are well funded groups who would prefer I not return to Hartford.

I have tried to be as direct as possible. If you would like more information on other issues, please email me or call me on my cell at 203-917-5027. Please consider meeting me in person on Thursday.

Best regards,
Dan

My response to his reply:

Lars Dahl <mothballviking@gmail.com>

4:39 PM (35 minutes ago)

to Dan
Hi Dan,

Wow, so you’re THAT guy! I sent out quite a few emails to “my elected representatives” in the run-up to the new law and your name (like many others) I’ve forgotten since. But I do remember reading about you after the fact; the lone contrarian from Newtown. Good for you!

Just a few words so you may understand where I’m coming from and the perhaps terse tone of my initial response to your email.

I am a gun owner, but not a fanatic 2nd Amendment gun-nut cowering in fear of the tyrannical government. If the good people and the legislature of Connecticut genuinely think the world is a better place if I am only allowed to load 10 rounds into my pistol designed to hold 15, I can live with that and still have a fulfilling life.

I am also not a single-issue voter; there is more to life than guns. I will not hold a grudge against anyone who votes their true conscience, however much I might disagree. So you may have already guessed that your actual vote on the matter is of lesser concern to me than your opinion about the abuse of procedural rules. What took place in Hartford those few days disgusts me to the bone. Though expected, I was really disappointed in how the Democrats hijacked the whole process in a way that surely violates the spirit and principles behind Emergency Certification.

I used to be a registered Democrat, but since the debacle in question I have changed my voter registration to Unaffiliated. I imagine you and I disagree on quite a few things, but it is refreshing to encounter a politician who still possesses a spine and who dares to answer a direct question with a straight, no BS answer. You may be surprised to learn (or not) that most reply with a form letter at best, filled with empty blather.

I hear you on the “begging for money” thing. You can’t play if you’re not in the game. Just let it be known that in my personal opinion money in politics is the single biggest factor hindering America from getting back on an even keel. I will therefore not attend your fundraiser (principle, nothing personal), but you can look forward to a small donation through your web page.

Thanks for your replies, for taking the time to hear me out, and I hope you bear my thoughts and concerns in mind (surely, I can’t be the only one) wherever your political aspirations take you. For obvious reasons I won’t be voting for you in November, but nevertheless I wish you good luck (and I’ve never, ever, said that to a Republican before an election!).

Best regards,
Lars Dahl

The proof:dan carter donation

Election 2014 – The Begging Begins – State Rep Dan Carter Wants My Money

Posted on by
1

I just got an email from local politician Dan Carter of the Connecticut legislature:

Dan Carter <repcarter@gmail.com>

12:25 PM (53 minutes ago)
to me

Lars, I hope this email finds you well!

I am running for another term as representative in the State Legislature. While I am not your representative, I do represent Newtown. If you are happy with the job I am doing, I could really use your support.

I am having a fund raiser at the Putnam House in Bethel this Thursday, May 22nd, from 6pm to 8pm. Please reply to this email with an RSVP or regrets.

If you can’t make it, I have attached a contribution form that you could mail in, or you can use the link at the end of this email to contribute online. The maximum contribution I can accept is $100 per person, but any help you could provide would be greatly appreciated.

Thank you for your consideration, and I look forward to serving you for another two years.

Best regards,
Dan

Dan Carter
State Representative, 2nd District

dan carter ct state rep

Dan Carter, Connecticut State Rep.

My response:

Hi, Dan!

Thanks for contacting me on the matter of begging for my money.

I’ve never heard of you and don’t know the first thing about the job you’ve been doing. Please help me make up my mind whether or not to part with my hard earned money for your benefit by answering the following questions short and to the point. Any attempt at evasive, vacuous politician speech will be dismissed and I will double my contribution and give it to your opponent regardless of who that might be.

How did you vote on the changes to our gun legislation post Sandy Hook, and, regardless of how you voted, how do you feel about the manner in which the law was passed?

Looking forward to your prompt and sincere reply.

Regards,
Lars Dahl, concerned citizen and voter.

I will update when/if I get a reply.

Draconian Connecticut Gun Law Forces Businesses, Jobs And Revenue Out Of State

Posted on by
2

K-5 Arms, Milford, CTI was out driving this morning and decided to stop by one of Connecticut’s larger firearms retailers, K-5 Arms Exchange in Milford, CT, to see if they had some 9mm on hand (good luck with that; the ammo shortage is still very painfully felt here).

Big was my disappointment when I found the parking lot empty, the doors locked and a sign announcing they were relocating to Texas, at least that’s how I interpreted it. I guess it’s a little hard to run a gun shop if your local government actively tries to shut you down by banning the kind of merchandise you’re in the business of selling.

K-5 Arms, Milford, CT closed.

Empty parking lot at K-5 Arms in Milford, CT. Another one bites the bullet. Sad.

K-5 wasn’t the best gun shop in the world or of the magnitude of Cabela’s, Gander Mountain, Bass Pro et al (mega chain stores are the devil’s invention and will bring America down!), but they had a lot of good stuff, were  reasonably well stocked, and if they didn’t have what you were looking for, they could get it fast, and had decent-ish prices.

I didn’t much care for the owner, Tony Soprano-ish arrogant bastard he was, who took advantage of you on trade-ins, but I will nevertheless miss them. Connecticut is a small state with not too many well run gun shops and we can badly afford to lose any.

If these guys can’t make their wheels spin under the new, draconian gun laws, imagine how many smaller mom and pop shops will just close down and disappear. Thanks a lot Governor Malloy. I hope the newly unemployed will have you and your accomplices in their thoughts come next election.

I know, I used “-ish” twice (thrice, counting this instance) in this post.

And So It Begins – News From My Inbox

Posted on by
Reply

I received this email from Midway USA today, one of the country’s largest online dealers of everything related to firearms, and of whom I am a customer:

Connecticut Public Act 13-220

Dear Lars,
On April 4, 2013, Connecticut Public Act 13-220 was signed into law by Governor Malloy. Among other things, this law implements licensing requirements for the sale of all magazines and ammunition beginning October 1, 2013. In order to be compliant with the new law on its effective date, we will be restricting the sale of all ammunition and magazines to Connecticut beginning September 17, 2013. This allows for all in transit products to arrive in Connecticut by the law’s effective date.
In order for any existing backorders to release and to continue purchasing magazines or ammunition after this date, you must be the holder of one of the following permits/certificates: CT Carry Permit, Eligibility Certificate, Long Gun Eligibility Certificate or Ammunition Certificate. Additionally, one of these must be on file with your MidwayUSA account.
The Connecticut Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection (DESPP) is responsible for the administration of the permits and certificates listed above. Please visit the DESPP website for instructions and many of the necessary forms to apply: http://www.ct.gov/despp/cwp/view.asp?a=4213&q=494616
If you have already submitted one of these documents to MidwayUSA, no further action is necessary.
If you have not obtained one of these documents, we encourage you to do so. Once obtained, please email (customerservice@midwayusa.com) or fax (1-800-992-8312) a copy to us along with a government-issued photo ID and we will update your account to prevent any disruption in our ability to serve you.
We are very sorry for the inconvenience and sincerely appreciate your business.
Customer Service
MidwayUSA

I’m including this pop song from 1970s Scottish heart-throbs pop band Bay City Rollers as a sarcastic post script. Figure it out if you can. If not, no biggie. And yes, I’m embarrassed to admit that I have this album in original vinyl

Jesus

Posted on by
Reply

I’ve been getting into a really bad habit lately of dropping books as soon as I think they’re boring, badly written, disingenuous, have too much of an axe to grind, or they write and cover a topic in a way I already agree with.

I’m about to take on Zealot: The Life and Times of Jesus, made perhaps more famous (infamous?) than it deserves (remains to be seen) by this outrageous interview of the author Reza Aslan on Fox News by Lauren Green.

I’ll get back to you with a review of sorts in a few weeks’ time (I’m a slow reader) to see if all the hullabaloo is justified.

EDIT 10-14-15: Yeah, so I read the book and I thought it was OK. Just wanted to add that Reza Aslan may have overstated his scholarly credentials. I thought perhaps he doth protested too much.

Connecticut: Lawsuit Filed in U.S. District Court Challenging Constitutionality of New Firearms Law

Posted on by
Reply

Not to sound repetitive, but I just want to make sure the word gets out that we’re not taking governmental abuse and overreach lying down. I’m not saying “from my cold, dead hands“, but I strongly oppose the manner in which, as well as the content of, Governor Dannel Malloy et al’s recent attempt to circumvent democratic process and undermine the 2nd Amendment. If you have an agenda, promote it openly, don’t try to sneak shit past the electorate with lies and deception. Just sayin’.

From my in inbox, courtesy of The National Rifle Association – Institute for Legislative Action:

Connecticut: Lawsuit Filed in U.S. District Court Challenging Constitutionality of New Firearms Law

Bridgeport, CT – Yesterday, a widely-anticipated lawsuit was filed in U.S. District Court in Connecticut, challenging the constitutionality of the new firearms law that was passed hastily by the Connecticut Legislature in response to the tragic shooting in Newtown by a disturbed individual. Despite this new law being called “An Act Concerning Gun Violence Prevention and Children’s Safety,” Connecticut’s new firearms law makes Connecticut citizens less safe. This lawsuit seeks immediate injunctive relief and a ruling declaring the new law unconstitutional under the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. It alleges that Connecticut’s new firearms law violates the Second Amendment, and makes both citizens and law enforcement less safe by depriving citizens of modern firearms that are in common use throughout the country for self-defense.

Brought on behalf of individual gun owners, retailers and Second Amendment groups, this lawsuit seeks to vindicate the constitutional rights of citizens who are harmed by the broad prohibitions and unworkable vagueness of the new law. This legal challenge focuses on Connecticut’s ban of more than 100 additional commonly-owned firearms, demonizing design features that provide improved safety, accuracy and ease-of-use features, including magazines that hold more than ten rounds of ammunition. This lawsuit also challenges the practical bans imposed by the new law on an even broader array of firearms due to the new law’s vague language and interpretative confusion combined with severe criminal penalties.

Plaintiffs bringing this lawsuit include an elderly widow who lives alone in a rural area where the emergency response time of a lone resident trooper serving the area is 45 minutes, a Rabbi whose synagogue in the Bridgeport area was broken into by intruders, a young professional woman whose efforts to defend herself are made more difficult by the loss of an arm due to cancer, among other individuals. In addition, retailers whose businesses have been severely harmed by the law have joined this lawsuit, which was conceived and organized by fellow plaintiff organizations: the Connecticut Citizens’ Defense League (CCDL) and the Coalition of Connecticut Sportsmen. Both organizational plaintiffs represent large numbers of Connecticut citizens whose rights to own the firearms of their choice for self-defense and other purposes such as sports shooting and hunting has been infringed upon by the new law.

Bob Crook, Executive Director of the Coalition of Connecticut Sportsmen, says, “This law will do nothing to prevent a tragedy or solve the problem of crime committed with guns. Instead of violating constitutional rights, we need to get serious about addressing violence and mental illness.” He continued, “Two recent independent studies by Pew and the federal government have just revealed that gun homicides are down almost 40% and general crime involving guns has dropped a whopping 70% since 1993, which corresponds with the elimination of the federal assault weapons ban. In contrast, the few areas of the country where gun crimes have increased dramatically are the very places where local or state governments have banned or severely restricted gun ownership by law-abiding citizens.”

This Connecticut lawsuit, along with similar legal challenges in New York and Colorado are expected to better define the extent of a responsible citizens’ right to own a commonly used firearm of personal choice for self-defense, defense of family and other lawful uses. Each of these states has enacted new firearms laws that, despite law-makers best intentions, make citizens and law enforcement less safe against criminals and the mentally ill who do not obey these laws.

Your NRA will continue to work in Connecticut and in other states across the nation to support and protect our Second Amendment rights.

PS
I realize that I may start to sound like a gun nut to some, and that I will have to diversify the targets of my ire to maintain my cred as a sane member of society. Stay tuned.

How Much Does Newtown Love Their Children?

Posted on by
2

After the Sandy Hook elementary school massacre in Newtown, Connecticut on Dec. 14th 2012, the entire nation has been up in arms about how this event was the tipping point, that we, as a nation, must take prompt and meaningful action to prevent future tragedies. If twenty dead children and six dead teachers doesn’t move us to take the necessary steps to protect our children, then we are all morally bankrupt. I firmly agree.

Politicians and activists all the way from the President himself down to grassroots activists on a local level, have made the rounds, parading parents of the victims around the country promoting stricter gun legislation, banning this and banning that, making teary-eyed speeches lobbying for “common sense” laws in the name of dead children.

On Tuesday April 23rd voters in Newtown rejected a budget that added $770,000 to the school and town budgets to hire extra police officers and unarmed security guards in all of the town’s private and public schools.

That’s how much Newtown loves their children.

Newtown is a fairly affluent town and the combined total of the school and town budgets were $111,000,000.

Connecticut: Attention Gun Owners and Sportsmen—You are Immediately Impacted by the State’s New Draconian “Gun Control” Law

Posted on by
Reply

From my not-really-so-good friends (final status still to be determined; currently I’ve signed up for a one-year protest membership against the hypocritical, dishonest and self-serving politicians on both sides of the aisle, both locally here in Hartford, CT and in Washington) over at the NRA, here is the short version of Connecticut’s new gun law.

Parts of the law went into immediate effect on April 4th, but I had to wait for an email from the NRA to get a decent rundown of what the new law actually means for CT residents and gun owners.

I have a conflicted relationship with the NRA (I’m warming up to them, though), and at this point still will not recommend anyone to join, but will instead provide a link to Connecticut Citizens Defense League (CCDL) for those who want to become active and/or support the cause locally. If you want to join the NRA I’m sure you can find them on the Internet on your own.

Here is the text of the legislative alert email I received from NRA-ILA (National Rifle Association – Institute for Legislative Action):

On April 4, Governor Dan Malloy (D) signed Senate Bill 1160 into law and, as expected, this law contains many onerous and damaging provisions that will only penalize responsible gun owners and sportsmen in Connecticut. Some provisions of this law are effective immediately, while others will go into effect in several months.

It is critical that you stay tuned to www.nraila.org to understand the impact of this new gun control law. Your NRA is doing everything in its power to reverse this dangerous law that has no affect on criminals and only impacts responsible gun owners and sportsmen in Connecticut.

EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY:

  • There is an immediate ban on the sale or purchase of magazines that hold more than 10 rounds.
  • If you currently have a state Permit to Carry Pistols and Revolvers, you may only load 10 rounds into your firearm when carrying for self-defense pursuant to a Connecticut permit to carry pistols, even if your magazine has the ability to accept more rounds.
  • You may not carry a firearm for self-defense if the magazine “extend[s] beyond the bottom of the pistol grip.” Many commonly owned handguns have magazines with floorplates that “extend beyond the bottom of the pistol grip, and could therefore be affected by the new law.
  • Due to physical characteristics, more than 100 firearms are classified as “assault weapons” and are banned immediately. Click here to see the full list.
  • With limited exceptions, individuals have to be at least 21 to purchase any semi-automatic centerfire rifle. This runs contrary to the current federal age limit of 18 to purchase any long gun.
  • All firearms sales, deliveries and transfers, regardless of where they take place, must go through a Federal Firearms Licensed (FFL) dealer or through the Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection (DESPP).

EFFECTIVE ON OCTOBER 1, 2013:

  • Individuals over the age of 18 must obtain an “ammunition certificate” to purchase ammunition and magazines.
    • The fee (tax) for this certificate is $35 and must be renewed every 5 years.
    • You will be subjected to a criminal background investigation.
    •  If you already hold a valid state Permit to Carry Pistols and Revolvers or newly created “long gun eligibility certificate,” you are exempt from this additional requirement to obtain a separate “ammunition and magazine certificate.”
    • You can apply for this certificate beginning on July 1, 2013.

EFFECTIVE ON JANUARY 1, 2014:

  • All currently possessed magazines that have the ability to hold more than 10 rounds must be registered with the DESPP no later than January 1, 2014 under procedures that are still to be determined.
    • Any non-resident who moves into Connecticut after January 1, 2014 will have 90 days to permanently disable, sell to a gun dealer or take out of state, any magazine that holds more than 10 rounds
  • Any semi-automatic centerfire rifle that can accept a detachable magazine and has specific cosmetic features, certain semi-automatic pistols and certain semi-automatic shotguns are immediately classified as “assault weapons” and must be registered with the DESPP by January 1, 2014.
    • Any non-resident who moves into Connecticut after January 1, 2014 will have 90 days to permanently disable, sell to a gun dealer or take out of state, any firearm that is now classified as an “assault weapon.”
    • Click here to see if your firearm will need to be registered by January 1 under the new law.

EFFECTIVE ON APRIL 1, 2014:

  • Individuals must apply for a “long gun eligibility certificate” through the DESPP to purchase any rifle or shotgun. You are exempt from this requirement if you have a Connecticut permit to carry a pistol or revolver; a pistol or revolver retail sales permit; or a pistol or revolver eligibility certificate.
    • The fee (tax) for this certificate is $35 and must be renewed every 5 years.
    • You must complete a DESPP- approved firearms training course.
    • You must submit fingerprints with your application.
    • The DESPP commissioner will have 60 days after the receipt of your application to issue the “long gun eligibility certificate,” which can then be presented to a licensed firearms dealer to purchase a long gun.
    • You can apply for this certificate beginning July 1, 2013.

It also remains uncertain as to the total implications to out-of-state hunters or individuals traveling through Connecticut. Your NRA will continue to keep you updated as the egregious provisions of this poorly drafted and deeply flawed law are analyzed.

No Longer A Democrat

Posted on by
Reply

There’s something sinister going on in Hartford, CT, literally, as I write this. The politicians are using a provision called E-Cert (Emergency Certification) to ram through a bill bypassing the normal committee hearings, thereby also bypassing the democratic process. The emergency provision was certainly not meant for situations like the current issue at hand. Both Democrats and Republicans are in on this scheme.

I don’t know how I will vote in future elections, locally, state, or nationally, but I do know I don’t want my name associated with a bad crowd – and I consider the Connecticut legislature to be just that – and I don’t want a D or an R after my name. The minor parties have mostly single-issue platforms and are irrelevant. Voting in America has become an exercise in choosing the lesser of all the repugnant evils put forth.

america in distress

There goes the neighborhood.

So today I went to the registrar of voters in Newtown, CT, and changed my party affiliation from Democrat to unaffiliated, in effect Independent. Fun fact: As a registered Independent in Connecticut I don’t get to vote in primaries. As if the general election system in America wasn’t poorly designed to begin with and broken further as it was, this is no less than an undemocratic slap in the face. Still better than being associated with people with no backbone and poor ethics at best, and downright criminals at worst.

Can I Legally Keep A Baton In My Car For Self Defense In Connecticut?

Posted on by
4

This the first in an occasional series I’ll call “silly, stupid, contradictory laws that the non-lawyer doesn’t have any chance of understanding”. Beware or you may go to jail for a long time for exercising what you thought was sound judgment.

In Connecticut it’s fairly easy to get a pistol permit. You need to take and pass a firearms safety course. Most gun shops and shooting ranges hold such courses on a regular basis for a reasonable price, and you have to be really retarded not to pass. Once you pass the course you submit your application to local and state police, and if you fulfill certain pre-defined criteria (no discretion allowed by issuing authority [EDIT May 23, 2013: The local issuing authority DOES have discretion to deny, however, this discretion is so seldomly used that CT, while technically a “may issue state”, functionally is a “shall issue” state]) such as you’re twenty-one or older, you’re not crazy, you’re not a convicted felon, you’re not an illegal alien, you will get your permit. It may take a while because government bureaucracy is notoriously slow, but within 2-3 months in most cases you can legally carry a firearm on your person in public, whether it be concealed (concealed carry) or in plain sight (open carry).




But what if I want to carry something less lethal, say some kind of purpose-built stick, or a blunt object to fend of bad guys who want to take your money or rape you? Here is where it gets stupid and silly. I can carry a gun legally, and even legally shoot and kill somebody who wants to do me harm if there is no other course of action available to protect myself. But if I carry a stick I could go to jail, while my daughter’s rapist goes free.

Now I’m not one of those people who think America’s future depends on the right of its citizenry to carry guns. I don’t think society will crumble if certain people aren’t allowed to carry any kind of gun anywhere at any time. I don’t think it’s communism/nazism to have some common-sense rules to back up the 2nd amendment. On election day I consider the candidates’ stands on many things before I cast my vote, and gun rights are, frankly, not at the top of my list. But I simply abhor stupidity. If I can carry a gun (lethal), I should also be allowed to carry a stick, bat, baton, stun gun, mace/pepper spray (all non-lethal) if I so choose. The way the law in Connecticut is written a bear in the woods may potentially sue me if I beat it off with a broken-off tree branch while it’s trying to get away with my picnic basket. Read and/or weep as you see fit.

2005 Connecticut Code – Sec. 53-206. Carrying of dangerous weapons prohibited.

Sec. 53-206. Carrying of dangerous weapons prohibited. (a) Any person who carries upon his or her person any BB. gun, blackjack, metal or brass knuckles, or any dirk knife, or any switch knife, or any knife having an automatic spring release device by which a blade is released from the handle, having a blade of over one and one-half inches in length, or stiletto, or any knife the edged portion of the blade of which is four inches or over in length, any police baton or nightstick, or any martial arts weapon or electronic defense weapon, as defined in section 53a-3, or any other dangerous or deadly weapon or instrument, shall be fined not more than five hundred dollars or imprisoned not more than three years or both. Whenever any person is found guilty of a violation of this section, any weapon or other instrument within the provisions of this section, found upon the body of such person, shall be forfeited to the municipality wherein such person was apprehended, notwithstanding any failure of the judgment of conviction to expressly impose such forfeiture.

(b) The provisions of this section shall not apply to (1) any officer charged with the preservation of the public peace while engaged in the pursuit of such officer’s official duties; (2) the carrying of a baton or nightstick by a security guard while engaged in the pursuit of such guard’s official duties; (3) the carrying of a knife, the edged portion of the blade of which is four inches or over in length, by (A) any member of the armed forces of the United States, as defined in section 27-103, or any reserve component thereof, or of the armed forces of this state, as defined in section 27-2, when on duty or going to or from duty, (B) any member of any military organization when on parade or when going to or from any place of assembly, (C) any person while transporting such knife as merchandise or for display at an authorized gun or knife show, (D) any person who is found with any such knife concealed upon one’s person while lawfully removing such person’s household goods or effects from one place to another, or from one residence to another, (E) any person while actually and peaceably engaged in carrying any such knife from such person’s place of abode or business to a place or person where or by whom such knife is to be repaired, or while actually and peaceably returning to such person’s place of abode or business with such knife after the same has been repaired, (F) any person holding a valid hunting, fishing or trapping license issued pursuant to chapter 490 or any salt water fisherman carrying such knife for lawful hunting, fishing or trapping activities, or (G) any person while participating in an authorized historic reenactment; (4) the carrying by any person enrolled in or currently attending, or an instructor at, a martial arts school of a martial arts weapon while in a class or at an authorized event or competition or while transporting such weapon to or from such class, event or competition; (5) the carrying of a BB. gun by any person taking part in a supervised event or competition of the Boy Scouts of America or the Girl Scouts of America or in any other authorized event or competition while taking part in such event or competition or while transporting such weapon to or from such event or competition; and (6) the carrying of a BB. gun by any person upon such person’s own property or the property of another person provided such other person has authorized the carrying of such weapon on such property, and the transporting of such weapon to or from such property.