If you live in, or are driving through any of the states listed below, then pay attention:

CT   MA   NY   NJ   DE   PA

Reports are coming in that CT State Police are stopping and searching
motorists with OUT OF STATE license plates for weapons.

Also indicated, is an unconfirmed report that CT State Police attempted to enter a persons private property to search for weapons, but was denied entry by the property owner. The home-owner told the Police to get a warrant.

Unconfirmed reports indicate that militia units near the front lines have increased their respective DEFCON STATUS to Level-2. which is one step away from a Call To Arms status

3%'ers are standing by to assist both the militia units, and their comrades in the affected area.

Any action like this has the unconditional approval from the White House.
Remember that they have tried for several years to get the guns out of our hands.

This administration is trying to goad the patriot community into action
so that they can decalre martial law, and use the military, as well as private contractors to sweep up all of the weapons
Those of you that reside in CT please keep the rest of us informed about this serious attack against the U.S. Constitution.
Pictures and/or Videos will greatly increase the public outcry, and help to get this situation under control before the bullets start to fly.

" Miller vs. US., 23- F. 486, 489: The claim and exercise of a constitutional right cannot be converted into a crime."

" Snerer vs. Cullen, 481 F. 946: Where rights secured by the constitutuon are involved, there can be no rule making or legislation which would abrogate them."

" Miranda vs Arizona, 384 US 436 p. 491: An unconstitutional act is not law; it confers no right, it imposes no duties; affoards no protection; it creates no office; in it      is legal contemplation, as inoperative as though it had never been passed"

" Norton vs. Shelby County 118 US 425 p. 442: The general rule is that an unconstitutional statue, though having the form and name of law, is in reality no law, but is    wholly void, and ineffictive for any purpose; since unconstituionality dates from the time of its enactment, and not merely from the date of the decision so branding      it. No one is bound to obey an unconstituional law, and no courts are bound to enforce it."

" 16th American Jurisprudence 2d, Section 177, late 2nd, Section 256 Marbury vs Madison, 5US (2 Cranch) 137, 174, 176, (1803) Finding that the statute conflicted with the Federal Constituion, Marshall considered it "the essence of judicial duty" (p. 178) to follow the Constitution. He concluded that the particular phraseology of the Constitution of the United Statesconfirms and strengthens the principal, supposed to be essential to all written constitution, that law repugnant to the constitution is void; "

Thanks to Fred for this great information