Before It’s News – by Live Free or Die
According to this breaking story out of Connecticut, the newly passed Connecticut gun law will soon be struck down due to a ‘technicality’ that occurred due to the rush too pass this bill. According to attorney Peter Sachs, the governor of Connecticut just signed “a blank piece of paper.”
A Branford attorney has uncovered a legal and legislative technicality that he says has rendered the state’s new gun law null and void. In an exclusive interview set to air Sunday on “Face the State with Dennis House” on WFSB-TV, Peter Sachs says state lawmakers made a key mistake in their rush to get a bill passed, that he claims will leave them no legal choice but to begin the whole process over again.
Relying on a stack of documents, Sachs told me when leadership in the general assembly brought the measure to lawmakers they did so by emergency certification, which is meant to speed up the process to pass a bill when an emergency calls for it. According to Sachs, state statute requires the speaker of the house and senate president to provide the facts in writing as to why an emergency certification is needed, something Sachs says Brendan Sharkey and Donald Williams never did.
“I believe what they (lawmakers) are going to have to do is start from scratch…the law was not valid. In my opinion the governor basically signed a blank piece of paper,” Sachs said.
10 thoughts on “Lawyer: New Connecticut Gun Law Not Legal”
Not only are they fricken insane, but they are brain dead stupid!
Hey Smilardog, look who’s on AJ’s show tonight.
My only question is: WHY?
Be back later. Dinnertime.
I am just now listening to hr two of the show and I guess Doug Hagmann is on in a minute. Hagmann’ source Rosebud has been right on.
Let me know how it turned out.
ooooooooooooooooooooooh thats the only reason its not legite hahaha idiots
dont care how many pieces of paper someone puts pen too not a one of any of these company policies means anything to the living beings on this planet what does matter is what they do when some moron trys to force it upon them all of this nonsense should have been stopped centuries ago
Just a blank sheet of paper? Well we all know that. But that won’t stop the police from making excuses and saying it is legal and the judges going along with it. Then what are you going to do. Round Rock police falsely arrested me for no reason and made up a charge that basically doesn’t make any sense. So if they can get away with it, then what’s to stop these idiots in Connecticut from getting away with it?
Don’t people know by now that there is no justice. There’s “Just us”. They can do whatever they want no matter how legal because they know stupid sheeple can be easily tricked into going along with it.
While they are at it, maybe they should check the NYSAFE Act and see if they got all of the right paperwork to pass the damn law. Maybe they did the same thing Connecticut did and the damn thing is not valid too. (Not like it is valid anyways). I mean even the state police say there are many loopholes in the damn bill. Who’s to say the damn thing wasn’t even passed correctly like this one in Connecticut. Someone or some lawyer should check that out and meanwhile, all of the people in New York ought to take their guns and stick them up the cops asses and pull the damn trigger. I’m sick of this bullshit.
Check the statutes of the State near you.
you will find that they are all copyrighted.
They are private law and apply only to those under conrtact (employees) or to those who volunteer to pay fines.
Every valid Statute must have a valid enacting regulation.
No State statute has an enacting regulation.
As a trick an enacting regulation date may be included after the Statute buy you will notice that it is contained in a pair of square brackets.
That which is contained in brackets is to be omited.
whala!!!! No enacting regulation date.
Bond vs. UNITED STATES, 529 US 334 – 2000,The Supreme Court held that the American People are in fact Sovereign and not the States or the Government. The court went on to define that local, state and federal law enforcement officers were committing unlawful actions against the Sovereign People by the enforcement of the laws and are personally liable for their actions.
The State and federal Government is a corporation and therefore the Congress, State Legislatures, City Councils, Municipalities and all State and Federal Courts are corporate entities posing as Constitutional branches of government.
Private corporate law applies only to those corporate creatures.
Google: United States Code Title 28, section 3002, Then scroll down to 15a.
look at it like this : Wal Mart enacts Gun control law. Does it apply to you?
The claim and exercise of a Constitutional right cannot be converted into a crime.”
— Miller v. US, 230 F 486, at 489.
“No state shall convert a liberty into a privilege, license it, and attach a fee to it.”
— Miller v. U.S., U.S. Supreme Court,[319 U.S. 105 (1943).]
“If the state converts a liberty into a privilege the citizen can engage in the right with impunity”
— Shuttlesworth v Birmingham, U.S. Supreme Court,[394 U.S. 147 (1969).]
“The general rule is that an unconstitutional statute, though having the form and name of law, is in reality no law, but is wholly void, and ineffective for any purpose; since unconstitutionality dates from the time of its enactment, and not merely from the date of the decision so branding it. An unconstitutional law, in legal contemplation, is as inoperative as if it had never been passed. Such a statute leaves the question that it purports to settle just as it would be had the statute not been enacted.
“A void act cannot be legally consistent with a valid one. An unconstitutional law cannot operate to supersede any existing valid law. Indeed, insofar as a statute runs counter to the fundamental law of the land, it is superseded thereby.
“No one is bound to obey an unconstitutional law and no courts are bound to enforce it.”
— 16th American Jurisprudence, 2nd Edition, Volume 16, Section 177.
“Constitutional Rights cannot be denied simply because of hostility to their assertions and exercise; vindication of conceded Constitutional Rights cannot be made dependent upon any theory that it is less expensive to deny them than to afford them.”
— Watson v. Memphis, 373 U.S. 526 (U.S. 1963)
“The maintenance of the right to bear arms is a most essential one to every free people and should not be whittled down by technical constructions.”
— State vs. Kerner, 181 N.C. 574, 107 S.E. 222, at 224 (1921)
“It is well settled that the Constitutional Rights protected from invasion by the police power, include Rights safeguarded both by express and implied prohibitions in the Constitutions.”
— Tiche vs. Osborne, 131 A. 60
“The power to tax the exercise of a privilege is the power to control and suppress its enjoyment…. A State may not impose a charge for the enjoyment of a Right granted by the federal constitution….
The power to impose a license tax on the exercise of these freedoms is indeed as potent as the power of censorship which this Court has repeatedly struck down… a person cannot be compelled ‘to purchase, through a license fee or a license tax, the privilege freely granted by the Constitution.’
Thus it may not exact a license tax for the privilege of carrying on interstate commerce…. This tax is not a charge for the enjoyment of a privilege or benefit bestowed by the State. The privilege in question exists apart from State authority. It is guaranteed the People by the federal constitution.”
— Murdock v. Pennsylvania, 319 U.S. 105 (1943).
“The provision in the Constitution granting the right to all persons to bear arms is a limitation upon the power of the Legislature to enact any law to the contrary. The exercise of a right guaranteed by the Constitution cannot be made subject to the will of the sheriff.”
— People vs. Zerillo,[219 Mich. 635, 189 N.W. 927, at 928 (1922)]
“When any court violates the clean and unambiguous language of the constitution, a fraud is perpetrated and NO ONE is bound to obey it.”
— State v. Sutton,[Source: 63 Minn 167, 65 NW 262, 30 LRA 630]
“Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be NO rule making or legislation which would abrogate them.”
— Miranda vs. Arizona, U.S. Supreme Court, 384 US 436, 491,(1966)
“There can be no sanction or penalty imposed upon one because of this exercise of constitutional Rights.”
— Snerer vs. Cullen, 481 F. 946.
“We find it intolerable that one constitutional right should have to be surrendered in order to assert another.”
— Simmons v. U.S.,[390 US 389 (1968)]
We need a whole bunch of dead, lawyers, judges, politicians ,bankers, cops and other parasites that should long ago have been extinguished.
Check out this one Joe L ” Defination of a Parasite” posted in the archives on FTTWR back on 3-9-2013. You tube removed the video but it is still here on the trenches archives is see. It is a good one on them parasites. 🙂