Tag Archives: ct

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.

Governor Malloy Incompetent And/Or Ignorant Or Just Plain Gangsta?

Posted on by
Reply

I got a, frankly, disturbing email from my good friends at CCDL today pointing me to this article on their blog and am reposting it here to help get the word out. This is the kind of thing that happens when legislators meet in the dark back-rooms in the state capitol building in Hartford, sneaking through legislation under the false pretense of so-called Emergency Certification to bypass the normal procedures a bill goes through.

Governor Malloy was on the Chaz and A.J. show this morning where he took a call on the new gun law.

Caller:
Hey governor. I’m just curious about this new gun bill that came out especially with pistols with high capacity mags. Right now I’ve got two 14-round mags that are only loaded to 10 as required, but it’s unclear, can I carry both of them if they’re loaded to 10 or can I only carry one?

Malloy:
First of all what you have to do is disclose – there’s a way to disclose that you have them and you’re grandfathered in. So, that’s how our law works in Connecticut. You don’t lose the right to have them, you just have to say that you have them. “Hey, I’m Joe. I’ve got two of these.” and that’s it. So the limitations that you’re fearing aren’t necessarily in our bill. They are – I think you’re referring to New York’s law, quite frankly, and New York has a different set of laws than we do.

The Governor is mistaken. The law he signed into law back in April does indeed prevent someone from carrying a so-called ‘Large Capacity Magazine’ even if it is properly declared, and absolutely limits the number of bullets to 10.

Section 25(f)(7) of Public Act 13-3:
“Pursuant to a valid permit to carry a pistol or revolver, provided such large capacity magazine (A) is within a pistol or revolver that was lawfully possessed by the person prior to the effective date of this section, (B) does not extend beyond the bottom of the pistol grip, and (C) contains not more than ten bullets.”

By requiring the magazine be “within” a pistol or revolver you are limiting the number of declared ‘large capacity magazine’ one is able to carry, along with the number of bullets it can contain. For the governor’s statement to be true you would need to carry multiple guns or find a gun the holds 2 or more magazines.

The Governor and Legislators were in such a rush to pass SB1160 they did not even hold public hearings, denying citizens their due process. Maybe if Governor Malloy had given the people, you know, those of us he called the “fringe of the fringe” a chance to speak about the bill, we could have pointed out issues such as this. Maybe if Governor Malloy had listened to those of us he labeled as the “fringe” he would understand the points of these new laws that are so confusing to us, the ones that actually try to obey the law. But, apparently, he doesn’t know what he signed into law.

This legislation is so convoluted that lawyers and elected officials are not sure what’s legal and what’s not. Donate to the CCDL’s Litigation Fund as we work to overturn this nonsense.

I strongly doubt that the wording of the specific section in the law is a mistake. I think they worded it that way intentionally to obfuscate the law and further disarm law abiding citizens. I had previously noted this almost tricky language and was planning on going to my local police dept. and ask for a clarification. But if Governor Malloy doesn’t know what he signed into law (bad), or doesn’t understand what it means (worse), or knows AND understands, but deliberately misinforms (worst), what can I expect from the police who are supposed to enforce the law? If I ask five different officers, how many different answers will I get? How many good people are right now unwittingly in violation of the law the governor himself doesn’t comprehend, risking arrest and imprisonment, a permanent criminal stain on their records and quite possibly losing their right to own (and much less carry) firearms?

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: 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.

Douchebag Doctors

Posted on by
1

I fucking hate it when I call a doctor’s office (a mid-sized operation  with several physicians averaging seventy patients/day, Family Health Care Associates in Shelton, CT, to be specific) and I get a machine that says “the office is at lunch” with no further info as to when it might be a good time to try calling again, and then your call is redirected to an answering service. This in the middle of perfectly normal Wednesday.

You would think with the cost of healthcare these days, and with the scrutiny currently being levied on the industry that someone would take a break from picking their noses and scratching their asses long enough to PICK UP THE GODDAMN FUCKING PHONE!

Two thumbs down for Family Health Care Associates in Shelton, Connecticut!