When THEY come for YOUR guns...


July 18, 2003, 04:04 PM
How do you think it will happen?

Will the military go door-to-door?

I doubt it.

I think it's going to happen in a scattered, randomly appearing way. You'll hear more and more about individuals or families who had their home 'raided' based on a 'tip' - then you'll hear about the 'arsenal' of machine guns and assault rifles which were confiscated for the good of the collective.

Actually, I think this has already begun.

I fear that most of us will not realize it's happening on a nationwide scale until it's too late.

What are your thoughts?

If you enjoyed reading about "When THEY come for YOUR guns..." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
July 18, 2003, 04:22 PM
What are your thoughts?

I expect to die of govt sponsored lead poisoning.

July 18, 2003, 04:57 PM
Guns...what guns...I got no guns?????;)

July 18, 2003, 05:05 PM
I doubt there will ever be a complete confiscation. They will follow they current road they are travelling. The ban categories of firearms from manufacture. Those that own pre-bans may keep them. Then they pass laws as some states have already done, preventing your firearms from being passed to your heirs upon your death. They must be turned in. Then they prevent the repair of firearms, such as is already happening with some types of NFA registered machineguns, claiming the repair is actually manufacturing a "new" machinegun. Combined with guns stolen and those confiscated in crimes, they will eventually have all firearms in their possession.

In the mean time, they pass as many restrictions as they can to inhibit people from getting guns. They attack manufacturers and dealers to force them out of business. They brainwash the younger generation into believing guns are evil and individual ownership is not what the second amendment is about.

Mark Tyson
July 18, 2003, 06:00 PM
The last post hit the nail on the head. Guns will be regulated out of existence slowly. They won't kick your door down, they'll just make it so hard to acquire new guns, maintain the ones you have, and practice shooting that guns will become rarer and rarer. The shooting culture will be eroded, and guns will increasingly be only in the hands of criminals. This is death by a thousand cuts.

July 18, 2003, 06:00 PM
A good friend, many years ago (25 +) when asked by me if 'they would ever outlaw guns' said something to the effect -
'It's not necessary, all that has to be done is make owning a firearm so difficult with conflicting/convoluted/confusing laws/fees/applications/justifications that MOST people law abiding persons will simply not bother' (paraphrased but you get the drift).

July 18, 2003, 06:06 PM
I expect to die of govt sponsored lead poisoning.

I think tell be a large out break of lead poisoning.

I'm sure I'll end up catching a case of it as well

July 18, 2003, 06:21 PM
Wow, good post. I think you've hit the nail on the head.

July 18, 2003, 06:22 PM
Oh I've heard that they'll use the street gangs to implement it, and/or that they'll do it 5 states at a time while restricting traffic flow and media. Personally I think they've already begun sporadically like stated.

If I can run I will but if they pin me down at home I'm taking some with me.

July 18, 2003, 06:28 PM
They way they are doing it in Maryland is passing laws such as "smart" guns that only the owner can fire, or ballistic fingerprinting and so on. Some of these laws are so vaguely written, that the agencies in charge of writing the regulations cannot figure them out, and wait until the last minute to spell it all out. With ballistic fingerprinting for handguns, very few manufacturers will bother to supply the needed sample.

And, they passed a law that any one convicted of crime of violence, including misdemeanors, disables that person, with one exception for old juvenile offenses, from owning a firearm. The State Attorney Genernal wanted to even include Disorderly Conduct as a crime of violence.

Another way is to make many technical violations of the law or regulations punishable by serious hard time with mandatory sentences.

However, not all is bleak. 43 States have in their State Constitutions RKBA. Something like 33 States now have "shall issue" CCW. It appears the Congress will bar frivilous law suits against firearms makers and distributors. And, politically speaking, the RKBA folks have become a serious force nationally. All this dispites something like 40 years of anti-gun/gun owner propaganda by the mainstream news media and other influential entities.

July 18, 2003, 06:35 PM
"The State Attorney Genernal wanted to even include Disorderly Conduct as a crime of violence."

So, if I got caught doing a nasty with a girlfriend in a parked car thirty years ago, I'm guilty of a "crime of violence?" Gee, yer Honor, I thought it was love, honest.

July 18, 2003, 06:41 PM
I think what they'll do is present themselves as being "two parties" who are "completely polar" on the issue. The first party will be breathless with indignation and righteousness and say things like, "Mr. and Mrs. America, turn them all in." They will have lobbying groups, some run by former members of the second party.

The second party will establish themselves as the "polar opposite" view on the debate, allowing moderate restrictions, sometimes opposing new restrictions, but never even daring to suggest the removal of the current heinous ones. They will have a famous lobbying group which knows that its very existence depends on there being a massive body of gun laws. The supposed pro-gun lobbying group will sometimes even draft legislation in kind of a "scorched-earth" policy, thus shifting the middle ground of the debate somewhere between "plenty of infringement" and "complete confiscation."

The parties will continue to pretend, publicly, that they are not working for identical goals and will pat themselves on the back each "election cycle" when the sheeple go to the ballot box and blissfully overlook the fact that a vote for either is a vote for both.

July 18, 2003, 06:42 PM
Otherwise, what Hkmp5sd said.

July 18, 2003, 07:15 PM
I'm glad someone posted this. I read a while back that you should always be honest with LEOs, but if they outright ban handguns, that would seem a bad policy. I was told by someone I deeply trust to "never give up your guns." I plan ot adhere to my friend's advice, no matter what the cost.

Monkeyleg, it might have just been lust.;)

July 18, 2003, 07:24 PM
So, if I got caught doing a nasty with a girlfriend in a parked car thirty years ago, I'm guilty of a "crime of violence?" Gee, yer Honor, I thought it was love, honest.

Of course, it's a crime of violence!!

Haven't you ever heard of "Assault with a Friendly Weapon"? :neener:

July 18, 2003, 07:41 PM
I don't know if that would ever happen but if it does I've no plans to sit at home and wait my turn. I'd hang a "Gone Huntin" sign on the front door. :evil:

July 18, 2003, 09:03 PM
"Guns will be regulated out of existence slowly."

They leaned this when they tried to outlaw the consumption and manufacture of alcohol. Wasn't that a stunning sucess. They started getting it right whith the "War on Drugs", which brought new restrictions on movement of your assets and easier police siezure of them.

Next, it will be restriction of information. After all, why would anyone need to know how to make (x)? The past is already being destroyed; ever look at the s*** that kids are given in Social(ist) Studies?

What was the line, in Koestler's "Darkness at Noon"? "He who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past", or something to that effect.

Standing Wolf
July 18, 2003, 10:11 PM
Some day, the leftist extremists will have taken enough small bites out of our nation's Second Amendment civil rights that they'll simply be able to revoke the Second Amendment. By then, our First and Fourth Amendment civil rights will have been chewed down nearly to naught, and there'll be no way to complain, nowhere to hide.

July 18, 2003, 10:14 PM
It's happing now, they just ain't got to your door yet.:D

July 18, 2003, 10:20 PM
Slight difference in the future removal of firearms and the prohibition era. With alcohol, they had an across the board instantaneous ban which didn't work. The public had grown up with alcohol and did not consider it to be the immoral beverage that those pushing prohibition claimed it to be. They simply took the product underground and continued with life.

With firearms, the long, slow process, which includes allowing us gun fanatics to fade into history while training our youth of the evils of firearms and never giving them the opportunity to learn, own and use them, the ban will succeed. Just as with drugs, the law abiding citizens will avoid them while criminals will continue to smuggle/manufacture and use them. The majority of American citizens have absolutely no desire to use heroin or to support its legalization. By indoctrinating children from the cradle that firearms are a similiar danger to the public, future generations will have no desire to own or use firearms.

July 18, 2003, 10:55 PM
I think Hkmp5sd's scenario is probably realistic...

But I'll bet they'll still be enough "business" to keep a south-of-the-border gunrunner in business...;)

Let's not let it get to that point, OK?...:cool:

July 18, 2003, 11:03 PM
Aside from the drip, drip, drip of administrative law, I don't think anyone has mentioned the threat posed by executive orders/state of emergency. Following sept11, I recall Bush declaring a state of emergency. Someone correct me, but most state CCW permits include a provision revoking the privelege in a declared state of emergency. It apparently wasn't interpreted to outlaw weapons carry this time around, but I saw no reason why it could not have been. Various legislation (i.e., Patriot Act, etc.) passed since sept11 have strengthened .gov's ability to "drop the hammer", with respect to gun rights, I would imagine. All that's needed is the right circumstance. Things could change dramatically overnight.

Another example is the official response to the beltway sniper. Nice men calling to inspect and perform various tests on Bushmaster rifles. (Perhaps hoping to get lucky and panic unknown suspect). Did all who turned in their guns have them returned? The astute gun-grabber would use public opinion to encourage compliance in light of some threat. "It's the right thing to do", as Wilfred Brimley would say.

Since we're playing "what if"...I'll advance this scenario. Local sheriffs take a stand against federal gun grabbers, perhaps deputizing large numbers of citizens, with authority to arrest federal agents for violating the constitution. Some rural state like South Dakota takes a stand. Perhaps some of the more talented writers among THR, could spin this into a plausible option. Now there's a pro-leo thread that would garner lots of input!

July 19, 2003, 02:52 AM
I think that has actually happened. I can't remember when or where, but I seem to remember a local sherriff running the FBI out of his territory over something gun related. I wish I could remember where, I know it was a southern state, maybe AZ?

July 19, 2003, 02:54 AM
You'll hear more and more about individuals or families who had their home 'raided' based on a 'tip' - then you'll hear about the 'arsenal' of machine guns and assault rifles which were confiscated for the good of the collective.

They're going to subtly and slowly raid every single house in my neighborhood?

Kinda dramatic, don't you think?

July 19, 2003, 04:06 AM
I think that has actually happened. I can't remember when or where, but I seem to remember a local sherriff running the FBI out of his territory over something gun related. HBK,
I think you may be referring to the Montana(?) sheriff that made the news ~ 5 years ago. IIRC, it was the INS that beat an illegal alien suspect they had in custody inside his county, while his deputy's just stood there and did nothing. The suspect sued INS and the county and collected on it. The sheriff later came out and said if he was going to be held acountable for the feds actions, then the feds were going to have to clear everything through him first, or he'd lock em up.

July 19, 2003, 04:24 AM
Hkmp5sd has it right,

But for some of us, the holdouts, the vocal hardcore minority, we will be lucky to get a shot off. They will probably arrest us away from home, in public. It will look real dramatic as we get jumped on by 4 or 5 plainclothes guys (or in my case 6 or 7), they throw us on the ground, show the sheeple around the our gun and pronounce us a terroist or something. No one will bat an eye. This will be long after it is too late, we will be too few and too poorly armed to do much.


Mark Tyson
July 19, 2003, 09:00 AM
No, you won't be too poorly armed to do anything about it. Even under dire circumstances, when used cleverly, a "pocket rocket" or a WW1 era .30-06 can still get you any gun you want.

But let's work hard to keep it from getting that bad. That requires us to stop being so friggin' pessimistic all the time! ;)

July 19, 2003, 09:01 AM
How do you think it will happen?

It won't. Instead, gun control will become less and less popular. Keep up the good work!

July 19, 2003, 10:34 AM
Every time the federales pull a boner and it turns into a charlie foxtrot there is always an after action report that features a "How can we keep that from happening again" section. Mind you the issue isn't changing behavior, the issue is how not to get caught at it.

Klamuth Basin Standoff
Ruby Ridge

Publicity is poison. Their goals remain unchanged, tactics continue to evolve. The best cover and concealment available in political confrontation is publicity. Every disaffected movement in history knows the trick.

Baba Louie
July 19, 2003, 11:45 AM
The legislation is in place, its called the Patriot Act.

Our activity can be/is monitored.

Pick a few "terrorists" out of the line-up, go to their homes, do the thing, preferably when no one is home (think ATF and Lawmaster in OK), bring the toys and computer in for display on TV news. Use words like "arsenal", "terrorist activity", "conspiracy", "danger to society", lock em up, don't allow lawyers access, throw away key.

Will they get them all? Nah. Not in the US. Waaaay too many arms out there.

Will it force us underground? Yeah. The smart ones left standing.

Will it happen? Or whould I ask WHEN will it happen? Sooner than later. Remember, this is a nation that outlawed beer for god's sake.

Will any ban be repealed, like prohibition was? Depends on administration in power and voice of the people. Probably as soon as we see UK relent on their war?

Once owning a firearm, ammunitions, or knife over 3" in length is a criminal activity and all of us are criminals by definition according to new laws passed at State, local and federal levels... and all personal property is seized under forfeiture statute...

Will it cause bloodshed? Did Waco?

Hope I'm wrong. My Dad painted this scenario to me back in '68. He thought it'd happen by now... thank goodness he erred on his timeline.


August 12, 2003, 03:50 PM
This is why I will Plan ahead and have a good Secure Hiding place.
I have no Idea what the worst case scenario would be, but I'd Imagine that such a move by the goverment would Result in a Seccond Civil war.

Hard to Imagine for some, but the most Logical Result of such a Ludicris Goverment action.

Providing of course that any US Goverment is Stupid/Suicidal Enough to try something that Insane.:scrutiny:

Pocket Pistol
August 12, 2003, 04:00 PM
All they have to do is produce the papers that say I have a gun by SN#.
If not they better leave before my broom handle just happens to go off and hurt some one.
Besides I have no guns, officially.

August 12, 2003, 07:21 PM
they already know...remember the form you filled out to get your gun?its all there,name, address,ssn,seriel number and type of gun.it wont be total from the start.it will continue as its going now with types.i think an immediate- total gun grab would be a very bad idea.even the antis see this.this is why they write up lil bits here and there,making it easier for gun owners to swallow.then move up and take another an another and another.

August 12, 2003, 07:35 PM
There are many ways around things if they come knocking with a list of SN's;)

August 12, 2003, 07:37 PM
In my best Hispanic accent

Guns...I dun got no guns... i dun got to chow you no steenkin guns.:p

August 12, 2003, 08:51 PM
"They brainwash the younger generation into believing guns are evil and individual ownership is not what the second amendment is about."

Well said. In 50 years, having a gun may be about as appealing as having HIV to most folks.

August 12, 2003, 09:40 PM
This sounds terrible, but I am starting to think that more and harsher FedGov attacks against gun owners are just what we need. Hear me out before going "flamecrazy". My rationale is pretty simple. If it is generally believed that at some point sooner or later the FedGov will move against us because we are percieved as threat, then it makes sense to have them do it soon while we still have access to military-style weapons. Its obvious that as time goes by, more and more restrictions, both soft and hard are being thought up and implimented by the powers that be. Our children are being indoctrinated in our schools to adopt a "pacifistic" approach to life and more and more varied organizations are marching lock-step with the gun-banners because it is "Politically correct". It will only be a matter of time before bullet "Taxes" will become a favorite tool of the liberal politician to penalize legitamite gun owners. Add to this the push for gun owners to carry more home and accident insurance(because everyone knows guns kill people), and all the other annoyances put forth by previous posters and the end result will be that it will be a huge, supreme hassle for the normal person to own any gun. And I think most folks will just let them go. I honestly believe this will happen. Most folks don't shoot regularly and will probably turn in the family firearm for something "useful" like a store voucher or concert tickets. Give it some time and we as a people won't have anything but butter knives to fight back with. I want the FedGov to come down on us like the heavy-handed entity that it is. That would push many fence-sitters off their perches and show them the true face of our supposed masters. Better to wake everyone up so that we can bring this to a resolution, NOW, before we are so weakened all we can do is sit back and hope that we aren't the NEXT house raided by the FedGov tonight.

Michael in Sandy, Oregon/Owner of IronWolf Industries

August 13, 2003, 12:27 AM
but I am cautiously optimistic. I see some signs of improvement in more states having "shall issue" and stupid lawsuits being stricken down, along with more and more people waking up to the RKBA philosophy in the face of the government failing to protect them. Plus we read here all the time about more and more people converted by THR members. One person at a time...

I hope I am right.

But let's work hard to keep it from getting that bad. That requires us to stop being so friggin' pessimistic all the time!



August 13, 2003, 08:14 AM
IRONFIST, I believe you may be close to the truth. I for one don't think what your saying is bunk. If the Brits had been less forcefull and more cautious about how the did what they did, public support for the revolution would not have been what it was.

The fact is Waco and Ruby Ridge may have done for the freedom movement what no book, official, newspaper or patriot could have done by themselves.

It seems in life that resistance is needed to build strength and character. It's life's worst that brings out the best in us. IOW, no butter without the churn. Just some thoughts...

August 13, 2003, 09:09 AM
I just had the thought that by banning shooting ranges, they can almost eliminate the gun culture in urbam/suburban settings where there is no place to go practice.

I'll bet there are lots of cities now with no gun ranges.

August 13, 2003, 01:52 PM
"How do you think it will happen?"

It will not happen. Gun control debate has shifted our way.

"What are your thoughts?"

Those of you looking for a fight should channel that energy into something more constructive. I recommend the political arena.

August 13, 2003, 02:58 PM
It's not so much looking for a fight, as seeing the writing on the wall. Eventually, the vast majority of American society will find it more socially acceptable to NOT own a firearm, than to to own one. Whether from financial, peer or FedGov pressure, sometime in the future it will be more likely that there ISNT a gun in the normal home, then there is. There will be fewer people who see shooting as a true viable sport, much more information in the media about how much it costs everyone to take care of a gunshot victim, and more of a quiet, unvoiced "distaste" for citizens who admit to legal gun ownership. If you look closely you already see the signs of this all around you. For example, A child draws a picture of a gun in school and he can be suspended and sent to counseling. A positive spin put on gun "buy-back" programs by local and national media and how much safer we all are when guns are out of the home. More and more signs in stores and restaurants banning CCW. Major store chains quietly cutting down on how many gun magazines they carry or pushing them into the back of the newsrack as if the magazines were pornagraphy. Venues that have held gun shows for years now stopping them for "insurance" purposes or from the demand of a anti-gun group. Stores that used to sell pistols, rifles and ammo, then only selling rifles and ammo, then just ammo and finally stopping ammo sales completely. The FedGov creating more restrictions, definitions and confusing laws that seem designed to make us just throw up our hands at the stupidity of it all. The loss of places to go shooting within easy reach of most people. If you start looking for the signs of the demise of the American gun culture... they are all around you. I dont believe that there is a vast conspiracy that is organized against us. I really don't. What I see is creeping incrementalism, a series of baby steps down a long road that leads to the voluntary disarming of America. When that happens we will have bared our throats and handed the FedGov the knife. The ballot box will be useless then to effect real change, because without the promise of a well-armed, citizen revolution that will defend the country when the FedGov oversteps their authority, they will do so time and time again, as we have seen. At that point any real chance of true freedom will be taken from us and we will have to embrace our existence as slaves and puppets because that is all we will deserve. Cut the strings now while you still can. We have the chance to say NO, to force their hands and make them reveal just how afraid of us they really are. The second ammendment of the United States Constitution safeguards the rest of them. When it is destroyed in principle and on paper... so are we all.

Michael in Sandy, Oregon/Owner of IronWolf Industries

August 13, 2003, 03:09 PM
Down on the fed/govs are we?

They are such bad people all the way around aren't they?

"They"--when I see that word used in context of fed/gov's I have to wonder if that person thinks all fed/govs are like the borg where they have no brain of their own and are just a cog for the collective.

"They" is just too vague a word.

Isn't that part of the problem to begin with? The US vs them theorists?

Lots of doom and gloom sayers here. Anyone ever hear of "caching"?


August 13, 2003, 03:25 PM
Resistance is futile.

Seriously, though, Brownie has a good point. I bet there are many pro gun people IN the federal government. I guess the question is what will they do when ordered to round up gun owners or confiscate their guns?

August 13, 2003, 05:22 PM
I expect to die of govt sponsored lead poisoning.

While it may be unfortunate, I think this will be true in many cases.

But the cure (giving up your guns) is worse than the disease (remote lead injection).

IRONFIST is right, the writing is on the wall. While I don't want to be a naysayer or a gloom-and-doomer, but look at it this way: I'm an Eagle Scout. I am proud to be an Eagle Scout. As such, I believe in being prepared. Now, some say gov't raids for your guns are unlikely, others say they're just around the bend. Either way, I want to be prepared.

So what does it hurt to discuss it, just to be prepared?


August 13, 2003, 05:42 PM
at the very least the gov't has no record of any of mine, livin in these hills has a few advantages.

August 13, 2003, 09:31 PM
brownie0486, I wish with all my heart and soul that I didn't have to be this nervous about my Goverment and its actions. I love my country, thru and thru and I know that the FedGov is made up of regular people just like you and me. The problem is that that entity that is made up of just folks who are part of a souless machine. Do you think that the FedGov cares one whit whether you live or die? It has become a living, breathing creature that is trying to assert more and more control over all of our everyday lives. That creature will do ANYTHING to remain in existence. I don't hate the people in the FedGov, I fear the power that they wield in our names. I fear their "good intentions". I fear their supposed need to improve the "public" safety at the expense of my own and my families safety. I wish that they would stay in the background of our lives, not making pronouncements and mandates and then threatening the states that don't jump on the bandwagon. The FedGovs power is like an steel hand in a velvet glove, except the glove is more becoming tattered and torn as they try to retain control. I want the glove stripped off now so that we can ALL see the way the world works. I don't want to contemplate giving up my comfortable life and all the rewards that I recieve as an American citizen, but I must. I am the last person who would bash this country, but in my opinion there is a huge difference between the FedGov and the country we all should love. The bottom line is that my Goverment fears me because I am a gun owner. A Goverment that fears its own citizens because they feel the need to keep their arms to defend themselves, is a Goverment that must be corrected by its citizens. I apologize for being so long-winded on this subject but I just want folks to think about the future and what their actions should be. Thanks for listening...

Michael in Sandy, Oregon/Owner of IronWolf Industries

August 13, 2003, 11:52 PM
Well said, IRONFIST.

August 14, 2003, 12:12 AM
Thanks HBK, I appreciate it. What is sad and terrible is that we even have to contemplate discussions like this. It truly sucks and I wish things were different.

Michael in Sandy, Oregon/Owner of IronWolf Industries

August 14, 2003, 05:57 PM
In the months following 9/11 I would have agreed 100% with you IRONFIST. I thought the 'round em up' day was getting closer and closer. Last year or so, I dunno, the JBT factor of the government has decreased ever so slightly. More states go shall issue, some (alaska) even go vermont carry. People are giving short shrift to the foaming at the mouth fools at VPC and brady campaign. The next few years may get pretty violent due to the gapeing schism between middle america and liberal-land, but I'm not as worried about JBT's knocking in my door to confiscate my 'evil babykilling laser-guided sniper assault saturday night black rifle'


six 4 sure
August 15, 2003, 01:51 AM
I have several theories how it will happen, but I’m not going to post them on a public forum. I don’t want to give the enemy any more ideas than they already have.


August 15, 2003, 09:05 AM
As I understand it, one of the first orders of business with the british troops in the 1700's was to attempt a gun grab across the colonies to subvert any possible uprisings aginast the crown's reps. Thanks God they were not successful. This is our government, our money, our freedom, our lives.

August 15, 2003, 10:03 AM
The libs are currently fighting desparately to influence the Federal Judiciary by using 2nd amendment beliefs as a test for approval of judges. If they ever manage to get the Supreme Court stacked their way, you can expect a flood of anti-gun cases to flood the system, so that an anti-2nd amendment Supreme Court can make several ruling sharply curtailing or in effect canceling the 2nd amendment. Actually the only ruling necessary is for a liberal Supreme Court to reverse standing decisions and rule that the 2nd amendment applies to state governments only, not individuals and your individual right to Keep and Bear Arms is gone in the "twinkling of an eye." Recent Supreme Court decisions indicate the Court is not adverse to going (illegally perhaps) beyond the Constitution if it chooses to.
Our right to maintain the ability to individually protect ourselves hangs by a very precarious thread!

August 15, 2003, 10:20 AM
I don't get it. I thought most of us here, in respect for "the
children," threw most of our guns into the nearest large body of water
some time ago. Was I misinformed?

August 15, 2003, 10:27 AM

I agree with you that truth is best and sooner rather than later.
We need to bring the RKBA issues to the foreground and air the issues
we feel are so important. More than that, we need to become
militant in actively, visibly, and vocally supporting our rights. I
don't think it's too late to at least ensure our minority rights--let's
resign ourselves to the fact that we may, in some sense, always be
perceived as "outlaws," 2A or no--but in a few years it might well be.
They don't trust us, we don't trust them--fine, let's acknowledge that
and go forward.

August 15, 2003, 10:38 AM
-let's resign ourselves to the fact that we may, in some sense, always be perceived as "outlaws," 2A or no

IMO, that's a very dangerous course to take.

If it isn't widely accepted that America = free humans, and free humans reserve the right to arms, then we're on a path to extinction.

August 15, 2003, 10:49 AM
The county supes in my county recently voted to draft an ordinance to ban the sale of .50 BMG rifles in the county. Their reason is that the rifle can be used by terrorists to blow up the refineries in the county. I was listening briefly to NPR (for the first time in probably a decade) and they were discussing the issue. I was stunned (but I shouldn't have been) at the discussion, and the terms being used. Anyone who was against it, was a "gun advocate". The ordinance was a Good Thing because it would "Send a Message". No one ever said what the message was, nor how the ordiance would really help stop terrorism (that was the reason given for drafting it), but hey, it was a good "first step". Next stop: State and Federal Legislation.

Then there were the callers. People with shrill voices charged with emotion, stating unequivically that there is NO repeat NO right to keep and bear arms. I'm thinking: Then what is that sentence in the second amendment? Did I imagine it? Is that the only right in the Bill of Rights where "the People" doesn't mean The People, it actually means "The State"? Seems that a lot of people are buying the load of you know what that the Constitution really doesn't mean what it says - it means what some black-robed judge and a gaggle of corrupt lawyers say it means. You and I just can't read. We need to have it twisted - er, I mean interpreted for us.

And so, what caliber is next on the list for banning?

August 15, 2003, 11:20 AM
People with shrill voices charged with emotion, stating unequivically that there is NO repeat NO right to keep and bear arms.

At one time, there were also people who shrilly asserted that they had the right to OWN other human beings, and that this was to the "owned" human beings benefit.

People can be wrong. That is the nature of freedom, it is the right to be wrong, make mistakes, hopefully learn from them, and improve as a human being. If you're not free to be wrong, you're not free at all.

The problem comes when you try to apply your wrongness outside of yourself.

Example: You might believe (wrongly) that you have the right to own another human. That is your right. Your right ends exactly there. The minute you try to enforce that right upon another, you're trying to wield powers and rights that not only do you not have, but that simply don't exist in the first place.

You're also free to believe that RKBA doesn't exist. That's fine, up until the point you try to put that believe into play by interfering with another.

August 15, 2003, 11:46 AM

I see your point and acknowledge the wisdom of it ("very dangerous
course to take"). But I think you know what I meant. In the prevailing
social climate gun owners are perceived by many to be radically
anti-social, atavistic in their beliefs and habits. By "outlaw" I
meant non-conformist in the grand old tradition of free men. I also
meant that we ground our rights in a law sanctioned by a higher power,
not the State. Perhaps I should have said "desperado?":D

August 15, 2003, 12:17 PM
I don't see armed stormtroopers kicking your door down and taking your firearms as the strongest possibility. Maybe in a few extreme cases.

The population could be disarmed by more subtle and passive means.

Example: A large tax being placed on ammunition and components for manufacturing ammunition. (I believe this was already discussed in California.) I am sure there are members here who already wish they could afford to shoot more often. I know I do. A huge tax on ammunition would undoubtedly dissuade many gun owners just by making it too costly. Like people that smoke pay a $5 - $6 tax on a product that maybe costs $0.50 to make. (I believe they refer to this as a SIN tax.):rolleyes:

Second example: An outright ban on manufacture and sale of ammunition and components for manufacturing ammuntion. (Rendering your custom 1911 a custom $1000 paperweight.)

I am not trying to give the wrong people any ideas. This is what worries me.

August 15, 2003, 12:51 PM

By "outlaw" I meant non-conformist in the grand old tradition of free men

OK, gotcha, and hear hear!


What it boils down to is that not everyone is up for self determination, and those who aren't up for it need to psychologically buffer themselves by either casting themselves or us in a role such that their self image as a worthwhile human being is preserved.

Unfortunately, that sometimes involves them demonizing us.

To a certain extent, we accept that role we are cast in, or not.

Whenever and wherever possible, we must live and portray the truth: that being a perfectly normal human being, with a job/kids/bills is consistent with being a free human, and being armed is the prerogative of a free man. But perhaps I'm flogging a dead horse, if so, my autoApologies.

In a similiar vein, whatever happened to men like my father, who supported and fought for the second amendment, even though he did not choose to personally excercise it?

Why has this perfectly reasonable stance ("The People have the right to be armed, but it isn't for me personally") disappeared from the public discourse?

Gordon Fink
August 15, 2003, 06:58 PM
I have several theories how it will happen, but I’m not going to post them on a public forum. I don’t want to give the enemy any more ideas than they already have.

Well, I’m not afraid to discuss the possible scenarios. The leaders of the gun-control movement are intelligent people, for the most part, so they’ve already thought of this stuff and started implementing it.

In short, our right to keep and bear arms will most likely be lost through incremental legislation, rather than through a bloody, unnecessary confiscation effort. This process is already well under way. We lost automatic weapons in 1934 and 1986. We lost the free commerce in firearms in 1968. We nearly lost semi-automatic rifles in 1994. (More on this later.) Along the way, we also lost the right to bear arms almost in its entirety.

During all these assaults on liberty, gun owners did little more than complain and grumble. At each small step, the consequences weren’t worth taking serious action. (I’m talking about civil disobedience here, not necessarily armed resistance.) You know the reasons. The new restrictions affected only small segments of the gun-owning community (e.g., “assault-rifle” owners) or created only minor inconveniences (e.g., no mail-order sales).

The future promises more of the same. Next year, the so-called assault-weapons ban may become permanent and may even be expanded. Gun owners will gripe, if this comes to pass, but at least they’ll have their grandfathered pre-ban semi-auto rifles and “high-capacity” magazines, so that’s all they’ll do. A year or two after that, future sales of unnecessarily destructive large-bore (say .50 caliber and up) rifles and handguns, “the weapons favored by terrorists,” will be banned. Some gun owners will grumble, but most won’t really miss those expensive, over-powered monstrosities. As the decades wear on, the gun-control advocates will gradually and in turn target those sneaky concealable handguns, deadly sniper rifles, and destructive pump shotguns, interspersed, of course, with legislation requiring licensing, registration, ballistic-“fingerprinting,” new “safety” features, and “smart”-gun technology.

I can hear the voices crying already: “But what about concealed carry? It’s expanding!” Ladies and gentlemen, let me submit to you that shall-issue concealed-carry permits are the biggest red herring of them all. Almost universally, gun owners have embraced concealed-carry “reform,” happily exchanging their right to bear arms for the privilege of doing so. And what the government grants with the stroke of one pen, it can take away with the stroke of another. Moreover, what good will a CCW permit be, after a couple more generations, once concealable handguns have been banned?

All this said, I think that the decisive battle in the RKBA struggle will come next year. The “sunset,” extension, or expansion of the “assault”-weapons ban will tell us which way the struggle will ultimately go. If the ban is made permanent or is expanded, gun owners will have effectively lost the struggle, and it will only be a matter of time before private gun ownership is restricted to single-shot target rifles and small-bore shotguns. If the ban is defeated, then there may yet be hope. Such a reversal would be almost unprecedented in the history of gun control! In this case, the tide can turn. If gun owners then present a united front, we can begin to roll back decades of immoral, unconstitutional legislation. Groups like the NRA can come to be about actually regaining rights, instead of merely fighting a losing defense of them.

If we fail next year, gun owners will not rise up in arms. They didn’t in 1934, they didn’t in 1994, and they won’t in 2014 when “sniper” rifles and “pump” guns are banned. Instead, their beloved Republican “representatives” who voted to extend/expand the ban will solemnly explain that they “couldn’t allow more assault weapons onto the streets in the middle of our war on terror”—right before gun owners re-elect them, that is.

Naturally, there are a few more variables that might factor into this equation, but history is impossible to ignore. Individual rights are continuously lost to government until a revolution or some other social upheaval brings change. Where such upheaval will come from in our era or in the future, I don’t truly know, but I do know that it won’t come from American gun owners. As a group, we can’t even agree on the importance of the Second Amendment to our Constitution, let alone the rest of the Bill of Rights.

~G. Fink

August 15, 2003, 07:38 PM
I only hope that if any of this occours, that it happens at a time when I ahve enough guns & ammo and a good Dry and Secure place to hide them in...

August 15, 2003, 09:35 PM
You know, I start reading threads like this and start getting really paranoid. Hell, I just got into firearms in a tangible sense and now I realize that they will go the way of the dodo bird.

I think someone should start a thread "When they come for your freedoms...". If such a thing were to come to pass and I had to fight with my guns, there would be one last bullet in my pocket if I was in a hopeless situation and the fight left my body, if you get my drift.:(

August 15, 2003, 11:27 PM
When the time come for us to bury things it should'nt be our guns.

Michael in Sandy, Oregon/Owner of IronWolf Industries

August 16, 2003, 01:34 AM
well, they won't come for my guns till last 'cause I'm gonna sell out all my buddies to get in tight with the BATF. I've been keepin a list on you guys and I intend to use it. ;) :neener:

In all seriousness, I think the debate IS going our way, in guns and in other things.

August 16, 2003, 02:17 AM
When the time comes for us to bury things it shouldn't be our guns.

I catch your drift ;) and agree wholeheartedly. :evil:

Gordon, that is one of the best posts that I have ever seen.


August 16, 2003, 02:36 AM
I think the federal government will use the slippery slope method. If you read this link here (http://www.davekopel.org/2A/LawRev/SlipperySlope.htm) you will see how effective it has been in the United Kingdom. While the culture here in the US in general, and rural Texas in particular, is such that it will take more time than it did in the UK, but that is only time and the powers that be seem to have all the time in the world to achieve the desired end, a disarmed society ripe for plunder.

August 16, 2003, 07:45 AM
but that is only time and the powers that be seem to have all the time in the world to achieve the desired end

Sometimes, things turn around and go the right way.

Anyone remember prohibition?

It was a bad idea.

We got over it.

August 16, 2003, 01:16 PM
It may look hopeless but it isn't.

The worst mistake is to extrapolate current trends in a linear way.
Things are not going to just proceed as they are. There will be reactive
processes; there are those in place already. And let's not forget
the principle of catastrophism. Large, unforeseen forces tend to inevitably
upend the safest of predictions.

Our best defense, though, is to get loud, noisy, visible, and militant.

August 16, 2003, 02:01 PM
Oh I've heard that they'll use the street gangs to implement it,

What you heard was correct. I have heard the same thing from other insiders as well. The government plans to let the street thugs be the frontline men in the raids for them. They will be allowed to loot and take anything in the homes they wish in the process. Foriegn troops will also be used and are already being trained for gun confiscation and US street patrol as well.

WE are at the closest to Nazi Germany now than ever before. Patriot act 2 (the "Victory Act") is going to be passed soon as well. I also garantee you that the new assault weapons ban will also go through. You had better decide what you plan to do now, before hand. We are nearing the critical moment.

Mark Tyson
August 16, 2003, 02:18 PM
So let me get this straight: street gangs will be unleashed in a Faustian bargain with the government to wreak havoc, creating an excuse for the government to disarm the people.

Next you'll start talking about the Trilateral Commission and Majestic 12. The black UN helicopters are poised just over the border, waiting to swoop down upon gun owners and enslave us . . .

Come on, now. I'm going to use the P word here. You are being, yes, paranoid. This is the best RKBA climate we've had in a long time, but all some people can ever see is the negative. The apocalypse is always just around the corner.

This paranoia is going to be the end of us. Not only is it embarassing and ample ammunition for our political foes but it distracts us. There are REAL threats to our freedom and REAL threats to RKBA, but we are doing no good fighting them by hunkering in the basement drinking bottled water waiting for the bombs to start falling or on the roof scanning the skies for those unmarked helicopters.

Joe Demko
August 16, 2003, 02:35 PM
Ain't no "they." "They" is "us." Everything that is happening is the result of who we elect.
See, Blain, all along you have actually been a Bilderberger/Trilateralist/Illuminatis/SubGenius/Council of Seven/Mason/Elderof Zion/International Communist/Sleeper and never knew it! Those insidious bastards!

August 16, 2003, 02:58 PM
The government plans to let the street thugs be the frontline men in the raids for them. They will be allowed to loot and take anything in the homes they wish in the process.

Sounds like a little too much time with "The Turner Diaries" I think. :rolleyes:


August 16, 2003, 03:09 PM
I want to know who the insiders are that explained the street thug theory to Blain.

If they were insiders, and had that type of info, I really doubt they would be talking to a very young man with a penchant for a "the sky is falling" atttitude as well as the one where all of "they" are after you.

Quick, look up, see the black helo?


August 16, 2003, 03:11 PM
Quick, look up, see the black helo?Hmmm, that's odd. I thought it was a really big bird. I'll be damned.

August 16, 2003, 03:15 PM
I really doubt they would be talking to a very young man with a penchant for a "the sky is falling" atttitude as well as the one where all of "they" are after you.

Sure they will, what better way to discredit a conspiracy than to make it available to people with no credibility. :uhoh: I don't buy that theory but if I wanted to hide something, I would give just enough information to the tin foil hats that they can spread in a totally absurd way, making it laughable to the general public.

August 16, 2003, 08:27 PM
I don't see armed stormtroopers kicking your door down and taking your firearms as the strongest possibility.

But still the possibility. Its been done before.

What you heard was correct. I have heard the same thing from other insiders as well. The government plans to let the street thugs be the frontline men in the raids for them. They will be allowed to loot and take anything in the homes they wish in the process. Foriegn troops will also be used and are already being trained for gun confiscation and US street patrol as well.

Thats exactly what I heard. And when the meet resistance the Delta Force will move in for the finish. MJTF, Multi-Jurisdictional Task Force.

This paranoia is going to be the end of us.

Lack of paranoia was hard on the jews, can't we ever learn from history?
(6 million.)

I want to know who the insiders are that explained the street thug theory to Blain.

Brownie, IIRC, it was Linda Thompson. I'm almost positive it was on her video, "America under Seige--The New World Order." I have it on video around here someplace, been awhile since I watched it. I'll send you a copy if you want it.

Quick, look up, see the black helo?

This is C. Springs man! I see black helo's every other day. I once had 6 count em, 6, fly over my house in straight line formation at about 150 ft, real low. Probably scanning me & my house. Trying to intimidate me. Totally black not dark green, unmarked. :uhoh:

Its not nice to think our government would be like that, but if we're complacent about giving the possibility credence Like the jews was, it kind of leaves us with our pants down. BOHICA. Preparing for the worst and it not coming is better than having our heads in the sand and 'being sure' that they'd never do that. It was pretty preposterous what Hitler did and most of our gun laws are copied word for word from the nazi texts...It don't take a brainiac to consider the possibility.:uhoh:

August 16, 2003, 08:41 PM
Nothing personal, but I wouldn't believe Linda Thompson if she told me the sky was blue, much less that it was falling. The woman is certifiable.

Those boxcars full of patriot-sized manacles have been sitting across the Canadian border and the UN armored vehicles have been being stockpiled in Louisiana since '93; they're going to start rusting, soon. Operation "Garden Plot" better hurry, before international signage conventions change again.

Look, even the Birchers have printed expose articles on most of that stuff being a combination hoax/product of active imaginations...

The slow "death of a thousand cuts" that Gordon Fink brought up a couple of pages back, however, is much more likely, as well as being already underway.

I once had 6 count em, 6, fly over my house in straight line formation at about 150 ft, real low. Probably scanning me & my house. Trying to intimidate me.

I get that all the time here. With me, though, it's usually maintenance hops and check rides from Tyson McGee across the lake.

August 16, 2003, 10:20 PM
Ok, black helo's. What is really scary is a funny looking UFO (not as in aliens, but that I simply couldnt identify it) was literally zooming accross the sky the past 8 months off and on. It would cross from horizon to horizon in about 45 seconds, and I could still see all the colors and differentiate the positions of what looked like aircraft lights.

Now either I have an SR-71 following me around at night or we have some new birds being flown way the hell out of normal areas from the new Area-51. Just considering the possibilities of what this phonomenon could be got me worked up to the point that I couldnt sleep. I considered calling the local airport so I could get the standard "I do not recall senator" or the "No, I didnt see anything and niether did you, do you read me?"

You know, I started off having a point to this post, but cant remember what it is now.:confused:

August 16, 2003, 10:28 PM
Quick, look up, see the black helo?

I had this happen:uhoh:.

I was 4 wheeling by Arivaca lake.I came over a big hill and there it was a big military HELICOPTER.( Apache i think) I was looking eye to eye with the pilot . He hovered for about 30 second and took off. Scared the sh*& out of me. :eek:

Now back to the tread:D

Right now thing are looking good for RKBA. The thing is we CAN NOT put are guard down. We must keep writing letters and voting.

Hilary is building up steam for her run for President and if the Democratic get control of the Whitehouse and congress. We are screwed and you can start burying your guns or loading the mags. :banghead:

I will locked and loaded:fire:

August 16, 2003, 10:40 PM
Nothing would make me happier but to find out Linda Thompson is wrong.

They got too much technology and power to not abuse it. So many doomsday conspiracy theories, of course some or most will be totally wrong. But chances are that one will be right or a combination of more than one. I don't necessarily take anyones theory as gospel, but I think it prudent to be cognizant of the potential that exists and to prepare for the worst. Just in case.;)

To dismiss all the conspiracy theories as paranoia and just sluff it off may be just as bad as being paranoid. Maybe worse if any of them turn out to be true...

August 16, 2003, 10:44 PM
You know, I started off having a point to this post, but cant remember what it is now.

You took off your tin foil hat, didn't you?

Thats THEM! Put it back on, quick.:D :D

August 17, 2003, 01:15 AM
Well one of the main informers is Alex Jones from www.infowars.com! Unlike some of the others, everything he states is backed up with documentation, and he never talks about anything which he hasn't documented personally, or seen in the mainstream news. There is enough craziness out there for us to focus on without worrying about things which are not documented/provable.

I do know some insiders as well...however, I will not reveal them at this time.

August 17, 2003, 01:19 AM
Is this the same Infowars that had the "secret footage" of the guy videotaping the plans for his clandestine government unit to start a riot in Times Square on New Year's Eve 1999, in order to facilitate the .gov clamping down and declaring martial law? That Alex Jones & Infowars, or a different one?

You realize that your refusal to even allude to the nature of your "insider connections" doesn't exactly help their credibility.

August 17, 2003, 01:46 AM
When people can't reveal their sources, it makes me very skeptical. I've heard lots of little stories that involve conspiracies. Some stuff, I don't remember what, was supposed to hit the fan in the mid 90s. It never happened, so I concluded that the little conspiracy stories were bull. If one had come true, maybe I could give it a little more of an open mind, but none came true.

August 17, 2003, 02:50 AM
I have proof that Blain is a disinformation shill for the Trilateral commission. However, I am not going to reveal the source or the documents at this time.

Lines secure, Space Dog.


Don Gwinn
August 17, 2003, 10:17 AM
After the street gangs, Delta Force is going to move in and finish us off?

Well, that's easy. We'll wait to start the New Revolution until Delta Force goes on a recruiting binge and adds a few million combat troops to its rolls. Right now, could Delta Force take and occupy your county, much less your state?

It would be stupid for any evil conspiracy to bother itself about guns at the moment. At this moment, in the U.S., there is a trend toward more gun rights rather than less. Stil, most of the world, over the last 100 years, has shown a marked trend toward gun control, most of it obeyed voluntarily by citizens convinced it's for their own good.

We have met the enemy, and they are us. That's a hard pill to swallow when you can just as easily blame it on some vague notion of "THEM" and have an easy target for rage and fear--without the necessity of ever actually confronting this vile, putrid, scheming nest of vipers. We know deep down somewhere that they don't exist, but they make it easier to find clarity and purpose.

August 17, 2003, 12:57 PM
If RKBA is ever abolished, it will most certainly be through incrementalism. Perhaps with the exception of the PRK, the PRNJ, Ill-annoy and a few others, a sky-high tax on ammo is very unlikely in the near future. This would lead to such outrage (in a state like Alabama for example) that I don't believe such a scheme would work in the real world (non- commie states).

The government has MUCH TO FEAR from pulling a stunt like an outright ban. I don't think it's necessary to spell out the details on this essentially public forum, but the repercussions of a gun ban would probably mean the end of the USA as we know it. The United States would be a very dangerous place, and most politicians with good sense know this. So for the anti- gun folks, incrementalism is the way to go, with stunts like registration schemes, ammo taxes, convoluted gun laws with "sneak attack" last minute interpretations, passing legislation for technology that is unproven or does not exist, and a whole host of other schemes to make owning a firearm too much of a hassle for the average Joe. All this in the name of "gun safety" and for the "children".

August 17, 2003, 05:55 PM
i don't really believe all this coming into my house and getting me stuff. far to large of an operation ever to be pulled off. they would have to do it at the exact same time everywhere(nowhere near enough man power). because when people got wind of it they would join together and be a bloodbath just like the revolutionary war. not sure which side would prevail, but i do believe that my lead would be a large step towards a final victory for gun owners across the country.

August 17, 2003, 09:23 PM
It's already happened in so many ways, we are all in denial. The M16 has been a standard weapon of our army for decades. I cannot own one because of the hassle. So many losses. We are so far.:(

August 18, 2003, 01:47 AM
The helos are dark green, people. ;)

On a more serious note, some of us might be better served if their next thousand dollars goes toward therapy instead of the gun cabinet.

August 18, 2003, 09:55 AM
Same thing for some people.;)

August 18, 2003, 11:11 AM
I know the Holocaust in Germany was a bit-by-bit, volunteer-before-we-come-after-you ordeal...but wasn't Prohibition handled in a much more abrupt way? Thus, the reaction out of people like us wouldn't be nearly as blatant as it was when they took the fun out of Saturday nights...

All I'm saying is, it won't be like Prohibition. Quick and to the point doesn't work when you've got people with an IQ higher than a rock against you. If something like what y'all are describing even occurs, that is.

If you enjoyed reading about "When THEY come for YOUR guns..." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!