Editor's Note: John Cinque has been catapulted to a place of prominence as a spokesman for gun owner's rights and to warn of tyranny in the State of Connecticut in the past year. He has taken it graciously as an act of Divine Providence. Recently, John was asked to write an op-ed for a Connecticut paper, the Hartford Courant. I reviewed it, made a few corrections and submitted it back to him. The paper made further edits, some of them which changed certain elements in the original work that actually tamper with the idea of alleged "assault weapons" and pure democracy over law. John has given us permission to publish the original article in its entirety for our audience. I'm sure you will all be encouraged and applaud the stand of this American patriot. Without further ado, here's John's piece.

A year ago this month the Connecticut legislature passed and Governor Malloy signed into state law a bill called the "an act concerning gun violence prevention and child safety." This bill was placed into law using emergency certification, which means it had no public comment or input. The Bill neither prevents violence nor protects children. However, the legislation has far reaching effects on the citizenry. The actual effect that this bill has is to convert law abiding citizens into potential felons by the tens of thousands. Neither school safety nor proven real issues, which lead to gun violence, are addressed in this bill. How does registration persuade a person bent on violence?

This Ex Post Facto law, passed in the dead of night from the bowels of the Capitol Building, is just the most current example of a mistaken Ideological Crusade that is "gun control." Requiring legislation on an object will not dissuade malicious intent. History has proven that registration leads to confiscation. For those who say it cannot happen here, I ask; what happened at Wounded Knee, at Manzanar, and New Orleans?

Those who are willing to see the awful truth of our current situation realize that the law has been perverted to serve ideology and political leaning over equal and exact justice founded on the protection of individual rights. Can there be any security to property or individual rights with this model at its core?

The Connecticut State Constitution is very clear, beginning with a Declaration of Rights. Article 1 Section 15. "Every citizen has a right to bear arms in defense of himself and the state."

Both the Federal and Connecticut constitutions affirm and protect the individual right to keep and bear arms. This right pre-exists both and shall not be infringed. A legislature which abrogates or diminishes a protected right through legislation inferior to the constitution has, in fact, created no new obligation to the citizen.

The SCOTUS decision in Marbury vs Madison holds that an act of the Legislature, repugnant to the Constitution, is void.

The very foundation stones of our individual liberty and natural unalienable rights have been subjected to a slow, insidious, intentional erosion for decades. Our republican form of government has slowly transformed into an unaccountable administrative state. This is unacceptable. It undermines our foundation. Can a house with no foundation stand the test of time?

Jefferson warned us that a Democracy can be the purest form of tyranny. We have been teaching revisionist history for far too long in our country. There is ignorance as to where our freedoms are derived from, and the limitations placed on Government.

Properly viewed, all constitutions are contracts. On taking an oath to support, protect, and defend said constitution, the official / agent becomes a bound party to said contract. These contracts establish the ground-rules for how the government is to deal with the originators (the citizens). When agents, entrusted with the care and administration of the created government, overstep their vested authority, and have abrogated the protected rights of the citizenry, they undermine the foundation for law. If a law is passed or a ruling is imposed that is an affront to that oath, their dishonor of that oath in itself becomes a crime; FRUIT FROM A POISONOUS TREE.

We The People have only two ways to deal with each other: reason or force. If you want me to do something for you, I must choose to do so by reason of argument or threat of force. Our proclaimed defiance to these laws is not founded in contempt for the law, rather a love of justice and stability of law. Is a system of law which has been manipulated through emotional decision making stable or just?

Those in government, who choose to rule by fiat instead of represent, have a choice to make; this choice is reason or force. The line has been drawn, and the People will no longer allow further encroachment of our natural rights. An armed society is a polite society. As long as the people remained armed, government knows that they cannot rule over the people by force. Those who stand in defiance of unconstitutional laws do so out of duty, honor, oath and love of country.

Editor's Note: Finally, I thought this appropriate to add to the end. It's a short clip from John about standing up, even when you are standing alone, because in reality, there are many you are standing for. If the truth be known… they are standing with you too.
As an end note, John supports Joe Visconti in his challenge to the governor's seat against Dan Malloy this year. If you would like to know more about Visconti, please read our exclusive interview and visit his website to make a donation if you are so inclined.

Don't forget to Like Freedom Outpost on Facebook, Google Plus, & Twitter. You can also get Freedom Outpost delivered to your Amazon Kindle device here.