Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 5/1/2002 1:40:20 PM EDT
I know this will be a terribly pessimistic question that implies we will eventually lose the fight. And for that I apologize and strongly advocate we stave off the inevitible for as long as possible. But I also think it is a forgone conclusion that we will lose, probably in the next generation. How long do you think we have until the "average peson" can no longer "reasonably" obtain firearms? I think because of our Constitution a total ban will be hindered until long after we are dead. But I think ownership requirements, additional legislation, model specific bans and fewer civilian legal firearms will make obtaining anything beyond a bolt action .22 much too difficult for the average guy to bother with. The rich will always be able to afford toys. The elite will always be exempted from laws. The criminals will still obtain anything illegally. So do you think this will evenutally be the case? How long before you think it happens? Do you see another outcome?
Link Posted: 5/1/2002 1:45:50 PM EDT
I'm convinced enought that I'll see it get to that point within my lifetime that I've been making minimum payments on my student loans and using the extra cash to round out the collection.
Link Posted: 5/1/2002 1:45:59 PM EDT
Link Posted: 5/1/2002 2:13:13 PM EDT
I am not sure it will ever happen, but it certainly won't happen in my lifetime.
Link Posted: 5/1/2002 2:15:28 PM EDT
Originally Posted By DoubleFeed: Good topic, good question. I put it at 50-100 years, at least. There is just too much political resistance to do it quickly. If anything was going to convince the masses to give up their guns, it would have been Columbine. I don't remember the toll from the Port Arthur, AUS shooting, but most guns were banned and collected in UNDER 10 DAYS after that shooting. That didn't happen here.
View Quote
Wonder what event(s) it would take for outright confiscation to begin here in the good 'ol USA?
Link Posted: 5/1/2002 2:21:20 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Arock: Wonder what event(s) it would take for outright confiscation to begin here in the good 'ol USA?
View Quote
I assume you're talking about nationally, Arock, because it's already happening on the state (CA) and local (Chicago) level.
Link Posted: 5/1/2002 2:21:29 PM EDT
Link Posted: 5/1/2002 2:21:48 PM EDT
20-50 years, tops. First they must pass some kind of registration and licensing. I expect this to continue piecemeal by State, as the Second Amendment is not incorporated under the 14th - the States are free to violate the Second Amendment. I do hold out hope that a Second Amendment case will make it before the Supreme Court and that glaring error will be rectified. If it is, I put the date between 50 and 100 years.
Link Posted: 5/1/2002 2:23:57 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Jarhead_22:
Originally Posted By Arock: Wonder what event(s) it would take for outright confiscation to begin here in the good 'ol USA?
View Quote
I assume you're talking about nationally, Arock, because it's already happening on the state (CA) and local (Chicago) level.
View Quote
Correct. What I mean to ask is what would it take to precipitate a situation similar to Australia where all firearms were scooped up in 7-10 days and nobody resisted.
Link Posted: 5/1/2002 2:25:50 PM EDT
While I am quite sure my son will, with the proper paperwork and permits, be able to obtain a black powder muzzleloader as is written in the second amendment... I am equally sure he will not be able to purchase black powder or percussion caps. With that in mind... I am collecting for him. I wish I had as nice a collection when I was three [:D].
Link Posted: 5/1/2002 2:29:25 PM EDT
This is why there's a Build-It-Yourself forum: [url]http://www.ar15.com/forums/forum.html?id=4[/url]
Link Posted: 5/1/2002 2:31:16 PM EDT
First they must pass some kind of registration and licensing. I expect this to continue piecemeal by State, as the Second Amendment is not incorporated under the 14th - the States are free to violate the Second Amendment. You know, I thought one of the fed jobs was to protect all of our rights under the constitution.(Even against the States)
Link Posted: 5/1/2002 2:34:09 PM EDT
In the past 20 years we've experienced a rapid [u]acceleration[/u] of our rights being eroded. Kids are brainwashed in schools to by hysterically afraid of guns and are TAUGHT that all guns are "bad". We are flooded daily with immigrunts (legal and illegal) who have no cultural history of private gun ownership and who vote away OUR gun rights. We have more and more Draconian Federal laws that allow the confiscation of guns for paltry misdemeanors you committed 20 years ago. Then we have the outright but unchecked violations of the 2nd Amendment by legislatures, Governors, Judges, Mayors and other entrenched civil servants in the form of Laws, verdicts, zoning restrictions and other edicts passed with little or no resistance from "our side". I'd give it 20-25years... tops. Posts like this make me want to visit [url=http://www.ammoman.com/]Ammoman[/url] pronto!
Link Posted: 5/1/2002 2:43:23 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/1/2002 2:44:46 PM EDT by Arock]
On a side note, being a Texan I always felt a certain camaraderie with folks from Australia. They too started as outcasts from society and faced similar hardships as our forefathers. Forges a certain strength of character to those who survived. So it came as a disappointing surprise when the firearms ban in Australia happened. Liberal politicians and all, I never expected Australians to have handed their firearms over so quickly and easily. Like I say I was really disillusioned at the easy compliance. Makes me worry about our strength of resolve if the established powers find an event so compelling that they feel confident in demanding our guns.
Link Posted: 5/1/2002 2:45:01 PM EDT
Link Posted: 5/1/2002 2:58:00 PM EDT
Link Posted: 5/1/2002 3:08:43 PM EDT
Arms are an extension of our arms, we will always have them in some fashion. God, only knows how they will evolve!
Link Posted: 5/1/2002 3:16:05 PM EDT
Originally Posted By ar10er:
Originally posted by KBaker: First they must pass some kind of registration and licensing. I expect this to continue piecemeal by State, as the Second Amendment is not incorporated under the 14th - the States are free to violate the Second Amendment.
View Quote
You know, I thought one of the fed jobs was to protect all of our rights under the constitution.(Even against the States)
View Quote
All of the "rights of the people" guaranteed by the Bill of Rights - with the notable exception of the Second Amendment. Even the 3rd Amendment (housing of soldiers) has been incorporated under the 14th Amendment (by an Appeals Court decision.) Only the Second has not. Thanks to the [i]U.S. v. Cruikshank[/i] decision shortly after the Civil War. Doesn't that just [i]piss you off?[/i]
Link Posted: 5/1/2002 3:18:47 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Arock: On a side note, being a Texan I always felt a certain camaraderie with folks from Australia. They too started as outcasts from society and faced similar hardships as our forefathers. Forges a certain strength of character to those who survived. So it came as a disappointing surprise when the firearms ban in Australia happened. Liberal politicians and all, I never expected Australians to have handed their firearms over so quickly and easily. Like I say I was really disillusioned at the easy compliance. Makes me worry about our strength of resolve if the established powers find an event so compelling that they feel confident in demanding our guns.
View Quote
Arock, I don't believe the compliance was easy or at least not wholesale compliance. Many of the out-back Aussies buried their guns. Now how would I know this. There was a brief mention of a PVC end-cap shortage among Aussie plumbers. Finally a reporter (got to give him credit for thinking) put it together. The Aussies were buying relatively short lengths of PVC pipe and a non proportionate number of end-caps thus creating the shortage. The same thing happened in Australia will happen here. The 'sheeple' living in the cities wanted the guns gone so they would be safe. Those living in the outback did not. More sheeple in the cities. No more legal guns. There are T-shirts showing the area carried by the Dimocrats and Republicans in the last election. Many of us are very proud of what that T-shirt depicts but what it actually forecasts is the beginning of the end for gun owners. We will carry the American outback but the sheeple will carry the cities. More folks in cities than in our outback. Oh, probably one more generation of guns as we know them. (I must add that further terriorists attacks will delay the coming gun grab.)
Link Posted: 5/1/2002 3:32:21 PM EDT
You know, I thought one of the fed jobs was to protect all of our rights under the constitution.(Even against the States)[/quote]All of the "rights of the people" guaranteed by the Bill of Rights - with the notable exception of the Second Amendment. Even the 3rd Amendment (housing of soldiers) has been incorporated under the 14th Amendment (by an Appeals Court decision.) Only the Second has not. Thanks to the [i]U.S. v. Cruikshank[/i] decision shortly after the Civil War. Doesn't that just [i]piss you off?[/i][/quote] So the 14th nullified the 2nd. Then rickyj and the Dems have a valid argument?
Link Posted: 5/1/2002 3:57:34 PM EDT
I hope our leaders watch the outcome of the Australian weapons ban. If history is any guide the crime rate will not drop much if at all. The bad guys will continue to have guns. Murder will not cease. I hope we learn from Australia's mistake.
Link Posted: 5/1/2002 3:58:42 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Arock: On a side note, being a Texan I always felt a certain camaraderie with folks from Australia. They too started as outcasts from society and faced similar hardships as our forefathers. Forges a certain strength of character to those who survived. So it came as a disappointing surprise when the firearms ban in Australia happened. Liberal politicians and all, I never expected Australians to have handed their firearms over so quickly and easily. Like I say I was really disillusioned at the easy compliance. Makes me worry about our strength of resolve if the established powers find an event so compelling that they feel confident in demanding our guns.
View Quote
I don't think the Australian constitution guarantees the right to bare arms.
Link Posted: 5/1/2002 4:02:29 PM EDT
Link Posted: 5/1/2002 4:13:39 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/1/2002 4:17:32 PM EDT by KBaker]
Originally Posted By ar10er:
Originally posted by KBaker: You know, I thought one of the fed jobs was to protect all of our rights under the constitution.(Even against the States)
View Quote
All of the "rights of the people" guaranteed by the Bill of Rights - with the notable exception of the Second Amendment. Even the 3rd Amendment (housing of soldiers) has been incorporated under the 14th Amendment (by an Appeals Court decision.) Only the Second has not. Thanks to the [i]U.S. v. Cruikshank[/i] decision shortly after the Civil War. Doesn't that just [i]piss you off?[/i]
View Quote
So the 14th nullified the 2nd. Then rickyj and the Dems have a valid argument?
View Quote
You misunderstand. (Something that I keep trying to get BOTH sides of the argument to follow.) The 14th Amendment was passed as a result of laws written immediately after the 13th Amendment freed the slaves. The laws, known as "The Black Codes" prohibited the freedmen most of their rights as citizens - rights spelled out in detail in the pre-war [i]Dred Scott[/i] decision as "priviledges and immunities of citizens". The 14th Amendment said that the "priviledges and immunities" of ALL citizens were to be protected by the Federal government. Subsequent Supreme Court and Appeals Court decisions "incorporated" the "rights of the people" protected under the Bill of Rights under the umbrella of Federal protection via the power of the 14th Amendment. Unfortunately, the [i]Cruikshank[/i] decision, immediately after passage of the 14th Amendment, [i]denied[/i] incorporation of the 2nd Amendment. And it's the only one that has been denied. Essentially because of racism, IMHO. The 14th didn't [i]nullify[/i] the 2nd, it's [i]not been applied to it[/i]. And it needs to be. Unfortunately, the [i]Emerson[/i] decision had to do with a [i]Federal[/i] law, so the 14th Amendment couldn't even be brought up.
Link Posted: 5/1/2002 4:18:26 PM EDT
I am with you, but the 2nd still exist.
Link Posted: 5/1/2002 4:18:46 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Arock: Correct. What I mean to ask is what would it take to precipitate a situation similar to Australia where all firearms were scooped up in 7-10 days and nobody resisted.
View Quote
Another "Stockton schoolyard" or Luby's Massacre, probably. They are usually the catalyst for ambitious projects like you describe. The Dunblaine shooting in Scotland was the death knell for the Brits. As far as nobody resisting... If my guns in my hands weren't involved in the shooting, then any comparison and causal relationship drawn between them would be false, and therefore so would any conclusions, legislative or otherwise.
Link Posted: 5/1/2002 4:23:02 PM EDT
Originally Posted By ar10er: I am with you, but the 2nd still exist.
View Quote
But what good is it if the [u]States[/u] are free to violate it? If, as the [i]Cruikshank[/i] decision declared, only [i]Congress[/i] can't infringe? I keep hoping someone will finally successfully challenge a California, Illinois, or Maryland infringement and finally we'll get an incorporation decision. When that happens, the excrement will hit the air-moving device, because a [i]whole bunch[/i] of restrictive laws will go out the window. I want a [i]Brown v. Board of Education[/i] decision for gun rights.
Link Posted: 5/1/2002 4:58:47 PM EDT
With that in mind... I am collecting for him. I wish I had as nice a collection when I was three [:D].
View Quote
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Originally Posted By RikWriter: I am not sure it will ever happen, but it certainly won't happen in my lifetime. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- AGREED I agree on both accounts. My two-year old has one hell of a collection going. I really feel that most gun-owners in America are at a boiling point. I'm not sure what the hell has been happening in KA, MA, and Chicago. If we would just stand united DAMN IT then this stuff won't happen. The Gov't keeps getting these laws passed because there is very little opposition. We need to unite and we need to fight.
Top Top