Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 4/27/2002 6:28:29 AM EDT
Link Posted: 4/27/2002 6:43:27 AM EDT
Most people have become dependent on luxury. Our cars, our hometheatersystems, work bonuses(if I misspelled that one it's because it is only in my vocabulary shortly). Mainly we are used to the ratrace that is our lives these days. Truth be told, and taking in mind the situation in where I own guns in my country, if an all out ban and confiscation came to bare. I would have to think twice to start a firefight over it. If a dictatorial regime arose, I think I would take my grandfathers way and take it to the woods. That's basicly the question you need to ask yourself. The main character in the Patriot took up arms again because his family was done harm. A son murdered a house burned. If these things hadn't happened to him he would gladly stay out of the conflict since he had seen it before. Kuiper
Link Posted: 4/27/2002 6:49:43 AM EDT
There is a quote that comes, I believe, from Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn's "A Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovitch" (or maybe "The Gulag Archipelago") that laments on the fact that the people Stalin had rounded up and imprisoned in gulags or killed didn't do anything to resist the secret police. He says that if they, who far outnumbered the NKVD, had fought when they got that midnight knock on the door, and maybe killed a few, the State would have run out of secret policemen long before it ran out of dissidents.
Link Posted: 4/27/2002 6:50:17 AM EDT
The entire might of Federal Government law enforcement was once brought down against a Church full of Seventh Day Adventists at Mount Carmel, Texas. One of the reasons given by Attorney General Janet 'The Torch' Reno for approving the plans for 'gassing' the Church building on April 19, 1993, was the admitted fatigue and need for relief and retraining for the FBI's Hostage Rescue Team (think about it - who were the 'hostages', and were they 'rescued'?) that was 'guarding' the Church. Just imagine if there were 1,000 such Churches on fire in the US! Where would the Feds be then? Calling out the Army? The National Guard? They won't likely get away with it so easily next time. It's been said that April 19, 1993, was a rehearsal for things to come. Well, it better be remembered that April 19, 1775, was also a rehearsal for things to come. Eric The('NeverAgain'IsNotJustAJewishExpression)Hu­n[>]:)]
Link Posted: 4/27/2002 6:59:11 AM EDT
Part of the answer is, I believe, available to those who can ask themselves "What does 'Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness' mean to you today?" If I had to simplify it, for me, it's enjoyment of family most of all. That and a really good pizza and an excellent beer! [:D]
Link Posted: 4/27/2002 7:01:24 AM EDT
Link Posted: 4/27/2002 8:02:27 AM EDT
Regret by hindsight is just that.....and I answered my own question thank you. Kuiper
Link Posted: 4/27/2002 9:59:21 AM EDT
When we discuss among our selves we are preaching to the choir, that keeps the choir strong. I would guess that like me there are folks here that have non-gun and anti-gun friends (20-30 for me) that know that if the government comes door to door for my legally owned weapons that they would not see me for awhile or ever. At that time everything they have heard me say will be fully realized (hopefully). The government is here for our protection not for the government’s protection. It is always realistic to resist evil, even if it is in the form of a government. If not done, what would we be left with? It is our job, for now, to keep these issues in there minds, so when enough ‘dots’ are visible, to them, they can ‘connect the dots’. Some people need the evidence to slap them in the face before they will admit it to themselves that it is time to pay for the freedom they have enjoyed for so many years. Would be better if they knew it now, while the cost is cheaper. People have to make-up their own minds. We have to hope they will then have the courage to act. Thank of what Mel Gibson is doing for the uSA population. With 3 movies (Brave Heart, The Patriot and We Were Soldiers (not seen this one yet)), he is reminding or showing for the first time to the sheeple, the fact that freedom is not free; it requires blood from time to time. The more ways and times this concept is seen and talked about, the better prepared the population is to defend freedom. SSD
Link Posted: 4/27/2002 10:18:28 AM EDT
I think alot of gun owners, even those who preach about doing this very thing, would wait it out and see what happened. I don't recall seeing any armed monitors showing up at Mt. Carmel to watchdog the FBI, atf, and later it turns out, DELTA. If it really happened that a ban and door to door search and seizure were implemented, maybe some would react with force...but then that has already happened in Kali, and I haven't seen any type of reaction other than compliance. One of the guys I work with talks a big talk about "They won't ever take my guns" then refuses to vote for progun people, join the NRA or GOA, follow what is going on with out rights in the news, or admit that it might be good to have anything but a hunting shotgun. So, they will be after his guns after everyone elses I suppose, but they'll eventually make it. His argument is, they'll never take our guns, not here in the good ole USA, when I point out that they are already doing it and his favorite SKS is already banned in Kali, he sticks his head in the sand...don't confuse me with facts.
Link Posted: 4/27/2002 11:26:52 AM EDT
Originally Posted By VA-gunnut: I can't help but wonder if we are clinging to some notion from the past.
View Quote
Probably, so what. Sometimes "progress" is bad.
Link Posted: 4/27/2002 11:33:38 AM EDT
It's good to know History!
Link Posted: 4/27/2002 11:56:10 AM EDT
I asked my friend if the government started taking all firearms if he'd fight. He said "Would I have a choice?" We had never discussed this subject before. IMHO, quiet guys like that are more common than we know. He didn't beat his chest and talk about how he was going to do this or that, but he already knows what he'd do. And each one is worth a bunch of the rambo types. When and if it happens, there will be a lot of abuses and atrocities taking place. That will move lots of folks into the resistance category. It doesn't take everyone, just a sizable minority. Anyone who thinks an armed and motivated citizenry can't stand against a government missed Vietnam. Your government may have the best hitech weaponry ever, but you can't use smart bombs and aircraft against a target you can't see, can't define, and lastly, can't find. In most every rebellion so far, a sizable portion of the armed forces (and in this scenario, probably police) was on the rebel side.
Link Posted: 4/27/2002 12:04:15 PM EDT
Turn them over? Nahhh,,, they'll never find mine.
Link Posted: 4/27/2002 1:57:13 PM EDT
Hopefully when the American people realize it's not only their guns they are going to lose, they will support the Constitutional side of the fight any way they can.
Link Posted: 4/27/2002 4:01:57 PM EDT
Post from kicker9898 -
I don't recall seeing any armed monitors showing up at Mt. Carmel to watchdog the FBI, atf, and later it turns out, DELTA.
View Quote
Well, during the siege itself, Timothy McVeigh drove to Waco three times to view the standoff. We know that the outcome of Mt. Carmel is what motivated him to pull his crap in your state capital! It wouldn't take a lot of imagination to think that the next time a standoff such as Mt. Carmel occurs, there will be another Timothy McVeigh pulling up to the last LE checkpoint with a truck loaded with fertilzer and diesel! During the siege, I always wondered why a couple of hundred Seventh Day Adventists didn't just march across the field to go into their church. The LE could not have stopped them without violence. I think that also might occur the next time something like Mt. Carmel occurs. To put it mildly, did you for one moment ever believe that the FBI would pull the stunt that they did on April 19, 1993????
If it really happened that a ban and door to door search and seizure were implemented, maybe some would react with force...but then that has already happened in Kali, and I haven't seen any type of reaction other than compliance.
View Quote
What's the 'compliance to noncompliance ratio'? In the beginning, it was estimated to have been less than 1%, I think it's crawled up to 10% compliance. So where are the other 90% of so-called assault weapons? 'Biding their time in the hands of their now-criminalized owners' I would be willing to bet! Eric The(SameAsMine!)Hun[>]:)]
Link Posted: 4/27/2002 4:05:08 PM EDT
By the way, boyz, remember the groups of protestors that drove up to Ruby Ridge and created such a ruckus during the Randy Weaver stand off? I think one of the reasons that Ruby Ridge ended as peacefully as it did was the presence of those witnesses! Eric The(SeeHistoryIsGood!)Hun[>]:)]
Link Posted: 4/27/2002 5:16:18 PM EDT
Link Posted: 4/27/2002 5:23:49 PM EDT
I will do what I have to do. I will die fighting before I become any man's slave. If the guns go, it all goes. I very well may die alone. So be it, I don't intend to live forever in this vale of tears. Actions speak louder than words.
Link Posted: 4/27/2002 5:30:43 PM EDT
Guns? What guns??
Link Posted: 4/27/2002 5:35:20 PM EDT
Originally Posted By EricTheHun: It wouldn't take a lot of imagination to think that the next time a standoff such as Mt. Carmel occurs, there will be another Timothy McVeigh pulling up to the last LE checkpoint with a truck loaded with fertilzer and diesel!
View Quote
Do you think that LE takes this threat of future McVeigh types seriously?
Link Posted: 4/27/2002 5:39:15 PM EDT
The big problem I have seen is that we will not unite. I have been shooting skeet and have discuss "assult weapons" and most of the people will say that they do not understand why I "need" or enjoy them. I am a well rounded collector. I enjoy "firearms". Some people get focused in their own shooting sport and the are willing to let the "assult weapons" go. They need to understand that they might not be able to have that deer rifle or shot gun in the future either.
Link Posted: 4/27/2002 6:03:21 PM EDT
Originally Posted By VA-gunnut: Is it realistic to think that we could really resist the government if they wanted to take our guns?
View Quote
It is 100% certain that there will be no resistance to gun confiscation. It's been 68 years since the NFA was passed in violation of the Bill of Rights, and even on this board, that violation is widely considered a legitimate act not calling for resistance. Inevitable gun confiscation likewise will be met with non-resistance.
Link Posted: 4/27/2002 6:10:32 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Blaze-Of-Glory:
Originally Posted By VA-gunnut: Is it realistic to think that we could really resist the government if they wanted to take our guns?
View Quote
It is 100% certain that there will be no resistance to gun confiscation. It's been 68 years since the NFA was passed in violation of the Bill of Rights, and even on this board, that violation is widely considered a legitimate act not calling for resistance. Inevitable gun confiscation likewise will be met with non-resistance.
View Quote
Great point. That again shows how gun owners were fragmented. The masses at the time did not want common people to have full auto weapons. Next it could be "assult weapon". As they say in "The Patriot"..."We need to hold the line"!!! Stay united.
Link Posted: 4/27/2002 6:15:38 PM EDT
Link Posted: 4/27/2002 6:19:17 PM EDT
Link Posted: 4/27/2002 6:21:31 PM EDT
Great thread VA. [:D] This is the kind of stuff that really makes you think.
Link Posted: 4/27/2002 7:17:43 PM EDT
IF any government wanted to take all the firearms, they have the means to do it: They have overwhelming firepower, manpower and intelligence (data) to make the issue a no-brainer. You undermine the married man's reluctance by penalizing his wife and kids – until he complies. You undermine the guy living with his parents by simlar means. You undermine the young, single independent undividual by searching his/her home while they are at work. The only way it breaks down is if the Army, N.G., F.B.I., Cops refuse to comply. Read your history books for the answer to that one! But, apart from all this, do you really think that with the 2002 technology available, that the tactics that were effective against the Redcoats, would be effective?
Link Posted: 4/27/2002 7:34:04 PM EDT
Link Posted: 4/27/2002 8:00:01 PM EDT
Post from stcyr -
But, apart from all this, do you really think that with the 2002 technology available, that the tactics that were effective against the Redcoats, would be effective?
View Quote
[b]stcyr[/b], have you seen this man? [img]http://www.sjc.uq.edu.au/projects/olympics/Terrorism/images/rudolph.jpg[/img] [size=4]Where is Eric Robert Randolph?[/size=4] He is still at large, is one of the FBI's "10 most wanted fugitives", and carries a S$1,000,000 bounty. He has been on the run since January 29, 1998 for the bombing of a women's clinic in Birmingham, Alabama. Authorities believed that Rudolph secretly turned up at an acquaintances' house loaded up with food and gear and disappeared into the dense mountains. A large manhunt with tracking dogs and helicopters failed to find Rudolph. Dogs and helicopters, and infared tracking devices, night vision scopes, and a virtual army of searchers. And yet they can't find this one man! Imagine if they were looking for 10,000 such men. Or a 1,000,000? The problem for the [b]Leviathan[/b], when it grows to be the size it is now, is that it can no longer find its own ass with both hands! The belief that the State will be able to handle gun owners, or even a small percentage of them, without so thoroughly destroying the rest of the country's civil rights, disturbing their sitcoms, etc., is ludicrous. And if it ever comes to a point in this nation's history, that the government can come against its own people to disarm them, and yet the nation does not violently react to that level of intrusion against its own citizens... [b]Then we're as good as dead already, and we will have absolutely nothing to lose![/b] So bring it on and let's get it over with, one way or the other! (This should be exciting![:D] Eric The(Hey!Where'sBinLaden?ChandraLevy?JimmyHoff­a?)Hun[>]:)]
Link Posted: 4/27/2002 8:03:26 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/27/2002 8:14:42 PM EDT by Blaze-Of-Glory]
(If the guys with the smiley faces (not you, Eric) find me in here, I'm hoping someone with a better rep than I will run them out, because I am enjoying this serious discussion.) Point by point, about governments in general:
Originally Posted By stcyr: IF any government wanted to take all the firearms, they have the means to do it: They have overwhelming firepower, manpower and intelligence (data) to make the issue a no-brainer.
View Quote
Governments have the conventional firepower, but fights can be won using unconventional weapons, which are available to everyone in any modernized country, as described in books and constructed from common materials. I consider the perception that governments have superior firepower to be an illusion, which can be overcome through education. Heavy taxation of a large number of citizens in any country may unify the taxed against the taxers. Unless government agents are present, governments don't know what people talk about person.
You undermine the married man's reluctance by penalizing his wife and kids – until he complies. You undermine the guy living with his parents by simlar means. You undermine the young, single independent undividual by searching his/her home while they are at work.
View Quote
I agree wholeheartedly. You also harass his friends.
The only way it breaks down is if the Army, N.G., F.B.I., Cops refuse to comply. Read your history books for the answer to that one!
View Quote
Please direct a dumb guy to the relevant chapter in his history book.
But, apart from all this, do you really think that with the 2002 technology available, that the tactics that were effective against the Redcoats, would be effective?
View Quote
I'm no expert on the Redcoats, but I would guess that there are always effective tactics available, as long as there are people motivated to employ them.
Link Posted: 4/27/2002 8:24:51 PM EDT
I have to ask why some people present this future conflict as a government vs. the peons scenario. Don't forget that the people who control these weapons of mass destruction are just like you and I. If it did come down to a group trying to "enslave" us I am pretty sure that there would be tanks on our side too. How many of the service members out there would go and raid your neighbors homes if ordered? You need to have a little bit of faith in humanity for society to work anyway. Realize that most people are good and it is just a matter of taking care of the few bad ones.
Link Posted: 4/27/2002 8:42:50 PM EDT
Those who fight back would probably be labeled "terrorists". I would imagine the media and Homeland Security spin will be to convert the words/phrases "pro-American" or "Patriot" to mean "pro-government". Those who fight the government, would be considered the enemies of the United States,... not it's heroes. I imagine it's pretty much that way now. The above was just another paranoid thought. I think I'll go find something to vote for. [:D]
Link Posted: 4/27/2002 8:45:31 PM EDT
I was thinking of door to door search and seizure. When all guns were banned and the sh*t was startin to hit the fan. And I meant service members like in the army or marines although I guess that the local cop would have an active roll too.
Link Posted: 4/27/2002 8:48:47 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Stealth: Those who fight back would probably be labeled "terrorists". I would imagine the media and Homeland Security spin will be to convert the words/phrases "pro-American" or "Patriot" to mean "pro-government". Those who fight the government, would be considered the enemies of the United States,... not it's heroes. I imagine it's pretty much that way now. The above was just another paranoid thought. I think I'll go find something to vote for. [:D]
View Quote
Only if our numbers are small. If we stop bringing in new members to our ranks then this is the way we would be labeled. But do you think that anyone could succesfully label 60% of the population as terrorists? 50%, or even 30%[?]
Link Posted: 4/27/2002 8:49:56 PM EDT
Link Posted: 4/27/2002 8:53:15 PM EDT
[b]EVERYONE'S guns have already been banned[/b], they're just taking their time rounding them up. Eventually you'll break one of their Draconian laws and the Feds will knock on your door and cart off your guns because you got in a bar fight 20yrs ago or because you called a mugger a "ni@@er" once or because you got a DUI 20yrs ago. [b]Incremental gun confiscation is already underway.[/b] We're not living in the past. We're just history. What did you (yeah - [u]you[/u] reading this) what did [b]YOU[/b] do when Donald G. Arnold, Vietnam Vet and Maryland Citizen of the year had his guns confiscated this January because he got in a fight 20 years ago. Me? I just sat there and went "tsk-tsk, that really sucks" then went about my boring life just like everyone else. And yet this happens every day. Federal law now disqualifies a person from possessing a firearm if he or she is convicted of a crime punishable by more than one year or of a state offense — including misdemeanors and common-law offenses — punishable by more than two years. Barfights, traffic offenses, domestic disturbances, alimony disputes, bogus restraining orders - no matter how long ago, all can be grounds for confiscating of your guns today. It was said that April 19, 1993 was a training exercise for things to come. What the JBTs learned was NOT to do it loudly in plain site with cameras rolling. Better to do it slowly, silently, one-citizen-at-a-time. They're brainwashing millions of kids at a time in school to be hysterically frightened of guns. They're importing millions of illegal immigrants with no cultural history of private gun ownership into our society to vote for more gun control. They're passing laws that turn millions of peaceful gun-owning citizens into immediate felons overnight. And what do we do. Holler and scream at each other on some irrelevant corner of the Internet all the while Big Brother Carnivore diligently takes down names and numbers. So to answer the original question, yes we are living in the past. Like some senile old coot mumbling and babbling on, constantly retelling stories of his glory days when could buy a loaf of bread for a dime and still have enough left over for box of ammo, all the while the great-grandkids roll their eyes and nod their head to the sound of Linkin Park blasting through their cd-walkmans.
Link Posted: 4/27/2002 8:59:31 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Rickyj: How many of the service members out there would go and raid your neighbors homes if ordered?
View Quote
I would break it into 2 separate questions: 1) In the future, if all guns were outlawed, how many of the service members out there would go and raid your neighbors homes for them? 2) Today, how many of the service members out there would go and raid your neighbors homes for non-registered machineguns if ordered?
Link Posted: 4/27/2002 9:05:54 PM EDT
The people revolted on prohibition and won. Could it be done again. Aren't the issues close? Just something to think about I guess.
Link Posted: 4/27/2002 9:08:29 PM EDT
Originally Posted By stcyr: "IF any government wanted to take all the firearms, they have the means to do it:" They have the means to do it as far as weapons, I agree with another poster that the people behind the weapons might have a problem with this...let's remember that not only would private citizens be seized....all those active and reserve duty personnel with guns at home would have to give up theirs too. As the clinton justice department's opinion was that only federally owned weapons were legal, even if you are in the national guard, army, etc. "They have overwhelming firepower, manpower and intelligence (data) to make the issue a no-brainer." See above. "You undermine the married man's reluctance by penalizing his wife and kids – until he complies. You undermine the guy living with his parents by simlar means. You undermine the young, single independent undividual by searching his/her home while they are at work." Now, when they start doing that, it's going to be hard to hide, and I think (i hope) that even anti gun folks would scream and organize if torture of relatives, family and friends were going on just to rid people of lawfully owned weapons. Plus, they couldn't possibly hit every gun owner at once. Once this started happening, it could get very dangerous to be a federal agent. The only way it breaks down is if the Army, N.G., F.B.I., Cops refuse to comply. Read your history books for the answer to that one! "But, apart from all this, do you really think that with the 2002 technology available, that the tactics that were effective against the Redcoats, would be effective?
View Quote
" Actually, I think many of the same tactics would still work and apply, only on different levels. The theory of guerilla warfare would remain the same. Eric, yes you are correct in your reply to me above, there were protesters and watchdogs at Ruby Ridge, and it's a new one on me that there were at Mt. Carmel as well...learn something every day. Also, yes I agree that noncompliance in Kali is high, as it is reported to be in Canada. Looks like only the English follow in lockstep, but we see how much their crime rate has fallen, so I guess losing their guns was all worth it...[rolleyes]
Link Posted: 4/27/2002 9:10:01 PM EDT
Originally Posted By VA-gunnut: We sit around and preach to the choir about our rights to own guns and how we will never give up those rights. Is it realistic to think that we could really resist the government if they wanted to take our guns? Would we even have some kind of chance? I also truely think the vast majority of gun owners will just turn their guns in when the time comes anyway. So is all this talk just some lost idealistic view of the past or are there still true people who believe what they preach?
View Quote
First there will be no "we". When confiscation happens it will be every individual gun owner for him/herself. So no I don't think gun owners would have a chance. I will not turn my guns in. When the time comes that that the government comes for my guns, my job is to kill as many of them as possible.
Link Posted: 4/27/2002 9:11:06 PM EDT
Hmm... The total number of gun owners in the country is estimated at about 50 million. The actual number is probably even higher, perhaps around 75 million. If only 1% of them actively resist, that's about 750,000 people. Anyone know the total number of LEOs in the country, feds, state, county, local? I'm guessing it's a bit less then this. A lot depends on exactly how it goes down. How could you stop 750,000 guerilla warriors without destroying civil rights, enraging even more people, and creating even more resistance fighters that you can't track? How many LEOs and millitary types will be willing to brutally opress their friends and neighbors? The Army may have lots of cool weapons, but almost all of them are only effective against large targets in a known location. Bin Ladin is still at large, despite the best efforts of the millitary and intelligence might of most of the "free" world. With a little care, almost all of the millitary's weapons would be nearly useless. Meanwhile, the Government has lots of huge targets of a known location. Wonder how many millitary bases will go along with the revolution, or be captured by it? How much hardware will the revolutionaries have access to?
Link Posted: 4/27/2002 9:11:34 PM EDT
Look at vietnam. superior firepower wins battles, people win or lose wars.
Link Posted: 4/27/2002 9:17:11 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Blaze-Of-Glory:
Originally Posted By Rickyj: How many of the service members out there would go and raid your neighbors homes if ordered?
View Quote
I would break it into 2 separate questions: 1) In the future, if all guns were outlawed, how many of the service members out there would go and raid your neighbors homes for them? 2) Today, how many of the service members out there would go and raid your neighbors homes for non-registered machineguns if ordered?
View Quote
I think I see what you were asking now, and I only meant to ask #1. I don't have a problem with the police coming and confiscating non-registered machineguns. For one thing this is on an individual basis where someone was breaking a reasonable law, unless you mean searching every house in the US for unregistered machineguns. Number one would require door to door searches. Second the number of service people that would do number two is about 100%.
Link Posted: 4/27/2002 9:22:37 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/27/2002 9:24:49 PM EDT by Rickyj]
Originally Posted By Philadelphia_GunMan: First there will be no "we".
View Quote
Yikes. Why not? Edited to add: Nice post mace[:)]
Link Posted: 4/27/2002 9:23:48 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/27/2002 9:26:52 PM EDT by kicker9898]
So Ricky, and not trying to pick a fight here, but...what you are saying is that an unregistered machine gun, even though the owner hasn't committed any other crime, is worthy of a door busting? I have a problem with that theory. They shouldn't have to be registered in the first place. In 1935 I imagine it would have been hard to find anyone who thought that was worthy of invading someones home for a raid....now everyone accepts this as a great law, and acts like an unregistered NFA weapon is in the same class as a drum of anthrax or a nuke. Edited to CMA
Link Posted: 4/27/2002 9:25:52 PM EDT
Originally Posted By mace: How could you stop 750,000 guerilla warriors without destroying civil rights, enraging even more people, and creating even more resistance fighters that you can't track?
View Quote
Slowly. Quietly. Incrementally. One at a time. It's already begun. It's already happening. [:|]
Link Posted: 4/27/2002 9:39:10 PM EDT
kicker9898: Well I guess that I might just be going soft but after a lot of thought I just believe that certain types of weapons should be registered. Do you believe in weapons restrictions? Does a person have a right to buy antiaircraft missiles? Or to keep the discussion on projectile weapons, should people be able to own cannons with no restrictions? How about a tank? I hope that you don't believe everyone has the right to own an unrestricted tank. I do NOT agree with the ban on new civilian purchases of machineguns. But do I believe that machineguns should be registered? Hell Yeah! Imagine what Columbine would have been like had they been running through there with SAW's. There are people in society that should not have certain weapons, that is just a fact.
Link Posted: 4/27/2002 9:48:45 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/27/2002 9:51:27 PM EDT by Blaze-Of-Glory]
Originally Posted By Rickyj: I don't have a problem with the police coming and confiscating non-registered machineguns. For one thing this is on an individual basis where someone was breaking a reasonable law, unless you mean searching every house in the US for unregistered machineguns. [Confiscation of all guns] would require door to door searches. Second the number of service people that would do [non-registered machingun confiscation] is about 100%.
View Quote
I suspect you are correct that 100% of service people currently would follow orders to confiscate a non-registered machinegun. I suspect that the majority of Americans currently find machinegun confiscation to be reasonable. And I suspect that in the future, the majority of Americans will find all gun confiscations to be reasonable. And 100% of service people will follow orders to confiscate all guns.
Link Posted: 4/27/2002 9:53:11 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/27/2002 9:56:25 PM EDT by kicker9898]
Well...we will have to agree to disagree on the NFA registration thing I suppose. For the most part I think that we should punish people for the crime after the fact, not punish other non criminal people for the crime before the fact. As far as unrestricted access to all weapons, heck yeah I would love to have an antiaircraft missile...man the ducks would hate it, and nothing left for my dog to retrieve. Course, he just looks at me and says fetch anyway...:-) Seriously, no I don't suppose I think that missiles should be available at the corner pawn shop. However, there was a long time that machine guns were available at the hardware store, as well as dynamite, without registration. No school shootings. Yes, gangsters used them during prohibition, it ended, no more machine gun crime. Fact is, most criminals of this ilk won't be able to feed a machine gun for the most part, they aren't all that great for robbing stop and gos, and imagine if those unregistered propane tanks had gone off as planned at columbine. A buddy I shoot with said after we bumped my AK for a while.."Would you want someone in your house with a weapon that would do that?" Nope, but I don't think registration is gonna stop em. If they want it, they'll get it. Edited to say, I wasn't exactly advocating an M1 abrams in every driveway. Although...I saw that episode of Home Improvement and it was hilarious.
Link Posted: 4/27/2002 9:54:27 PM EDT
Originally Posted By EricTheHun: And yet they can't find this one man! Imagine if they were looking for 10,000 such men. Or a 1,000,000? Eric The(Hey!Where'sBinLaden?ChandraLevy?JimmyHoff­a?)Hun[>]:)]
View Quote
... or 10,000,000. I can see it.
Link Posted: 4/27/2002 10:04:04 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Rickyj:
Originally Posted By Philadelphia_GunMan: First there will be no "we".
View Quote
Yikes. Why not? I meant no "we" because the government will come after us one at a time.
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top