1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

One thing I could never understand.....

Discussion in 'General Gun Discussions' started by Hokkmike, Nov 8, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Hokkmike

    Hokkmike Well-Known Member

    Let me start with the disclaimer and statement that I support the unfettered and absolute right of every American to buy, own, and use guns for any and all lawful purposes. I also support the right to carry open and/or concealed. I vote for candidates who agree with these positions. While it serves hunters the Second Amendment is broader in scope and an umbrella of protection for all gun owners. I myself have a LTCF (PA) and a federal Curios & Relic license. I frequent the range where I have been a 20 year plus member and have hunted for over 35 years. I just don't want any of you to misinterpret the point I am going to make. (underlined below)

    I know locally in central Pennsylvania that many dealers I frequent have handguns, especially used cheaper ones, flying off their shelves. I can see it in the remaining available inventories and it is also what they tell me. The same is more and more true with military style semi-auto rifles. You literally cannot find any decent AK's locally in the mom & pop or larger chain stores.

    So, here is my point. Are most people assuming that prior ownership will prevent the gov't fom passing laws that will not only prevent future purchases of some of these types of guns but at the same time allow lawful owners to keep those they do have. It is my suspicion that the gov't could just as easily require that any future banned guns of these types be turned in, and/or registered or taxed more heavily, or jack up ammo prices. In other words they would make prior possession a crime or a great inconvienence.

    Sure, I know that many people's guns will be "stolen", "lost", or that many pledge to defend their rights to the uttermost, but what would really happen? And beyond that, and my point for discsussion in this thread, is to question whether buying quantities (or hoarding) firearms that we fear will be regulated will be of any benefit.

    I know a gentleman locally, and they'll never get it out of me, that has acquired a very nice collection of AR's and AK's.

    One thing I could never understand is do people really thinks that buying a quantity of semi-auto pistols, for example, is any protection against the enactment of such laws?

    Well, it is just a topic for discussion. What do you think?
  2. r1derbike

    r1derbike Well-Known Member

    Hard to qualify why people do what they do. Fear? I will say the "run" on sales certainly has given suppliers a needed lift going into the holiday season!

    With all the past, present, and future sales, U.S. citizens are becoming a well-armed lot.

    Perhaps they feel that government tyranny is lapping at their thresholds?
    Last edited: Nov 8, 2012
  3. EddieNFL

    EddieNFL member

    I think if you don't have one when a ban is put in effect, it won't be any easier to get.
  4. Texan Scott

    Texan Scott Well-Known Member

    From the 5th amendment :

    ... nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

    The US govmnt would immediately face the objection that they can't simply seize valuable property that was legal when purchased.... and compensation that we would accept is prohibitively expensive. That's the practical basis for legal grandfathering.
  5. Hokkmike

    Hokkmike Well-Known Member

    Texan Scott I hope you are right sir!
  6. Steel Horse Rider

    Steel Horse Rider Well-Known Member

    It is easier to keep something you already have than to get something that is considered contraband.
  7. Warp

    Warp Well-Known Member

    Yes, most people are assuming that.

    Laws making such common and legal items illegal would be insanely difficult to pass and ridiculously unpopular.

    A federal law making, say, an AR15 pattern rifle illegal is so unlikely to happen it is barely even worth my time to respond to somebody worried about that.
  8. Apachedriver

    Apachedriver Well-Known Member

    I hope Texan Scott is right as well. But there have been many governments throughout history that just run right over the people when they get push back on their "rule".

    It's easy to explain the buying due to panic. The more powerless you feel, the more apt you are to blindly do anything just as long as it feels like something. A drowning person will still thrash and flail even though, in their right mind, they know it does no good. It's panic.

    You suddenly believe, whether true or not, that you are out of options and the thrashing(panic buying) starts. It even affects those that know better once they see the things they want or need start to go up in price or disappear from shelves. That's self-preservation on their part.

    The best thing to do is not buy for yourself alone, but convince others, that are not currently owners, to exercise their rights thru purchases. The more responsible citizens that become gun owners, the more people there are to push back against legislators when anti-gun issues come down the pike.

    If you stand to lose something, I feel bad for you. If I stand to lose something too, now it's an all out crisis.
  9. r1derbike

    r1derbike Well-Known Member

  10. Hardtarget

    Hardtarget Well-Known Member

    Well, so far, the currant regieme has thummed its nose at the Constitution several times and done a good job of by-passing congress to make "czars" to run "government bureaus" that make rules that run roughshot over many of our rights.

    just sayin'...

    a couple of "reasonable new gun laws" wouldn't be a stretch.

  11. msb45

    msb45 Well-Known Member

    I bought another AR before the election. In the past the AWB and the GCA of '34 allowed for either keeping or grandfathering the registration of guns. Of course the UK and Australia did confiscations.

    I'm thinking of buying a single shot 12Ga and a double barrel so I can have guns that may be ban friendly. Along with revolvers they may have a better chance of banning.
  12. medalguy

    medalguy Well-Known Member

    Yes but the UK DOES NOT HAVE A CONSTITUTION. Not sure about Australia. Hopefully that might make a difference here. Plus the UK has been subject to severe firearms regulations since back before WW II. They were used to severe laws, and when the time came to take their guns away, the sheeple went along.
  13. Wanderling

    Wanderling Well-Known Member

    How many panic-induced buying sprees that caused an increase in sales and pricing of guns and ammo was there in the last decade(s) ?

    The very recurring nature of it makes my inner cynic suspicious. Surely if I was selling the product, I wouldn't be below spreading some rumors when there's such an impact on my bottom line. It's smart marketing. Just saying...
  14. FROGO207

    FROGO207 Well-Known Member

    If such a law (restrictions) was forced on us with respect to handguns they would be in the same boat as NFA/destructive devices I would bet. Anything else would not fly with anyone presently.
  15. Davek1977

    Davek1977 Well-Known Member

    The federal govt of the US has never tried to implement an outright ownership ban, because frankly, with the number of guns out there, the lack of central registrations, etc, it would be all but impossible to enforce. There are millions of guns out there, and the govt only has an inkling of whats where, with no real solid information. Enforcing such a ban, realistically, would mean a search of the entire US, which is unfathomable, unless it was done on a "volunteer" basis. How many die-hard gun rights supporters do you suppose would turn in thousands of dollars worth of now contraband merely because someone asked them to do so nicely? The sheer magnitude of the proposition make it all but impossible to enact, let alone enforce, and honestly, while attempts may be made, I don't actually see a ban passing in this political climate. A law has to have some teeth, and enforcement of this one would be a disaster as far as Constitutional arguments go. We have issues involving the 2nd, 4th, and 5th Amendments certainly, and perhaps others. Our Constitution protects us from arbitrary searches and seizures, and from unlawful taking of property. Our rights would have to be eroded significantly before such laws would ever be enacted let alone enforced.
  16. Hokkmike

    Hokkmike Well-Known Member

    There are millions of guns out there, and the govt only has an inkling of whats where, with no real solid information. Enforcing such a ban, realistically, would mean a search of the entire US, which is unfathomable, unless it was done on a "volunteer" basis. How many die-hard gun rights supporters do you suppose would turn in thousands of dollars worth of now contraband merely because someone asked them to do so nicely?...Davek1977

    What you say is true. But what good are they of you have to hide them and can't shoot, use, trade, sell, or buy them?
  17. JohnBT

    JohnBT Well-Known Member

    "do people really thinks that buying a quantity of semi-auto pistols,"

    ...is a superior investment to buying a one-year CD that pays 1/10th of one percent? Yes.

    Heck, SunTrust tried to sell me a 5-year CD that paid 1.24%. (Since my father died last year I'm in charge of mom's money (mostly in CDs) because she's in a nursing home with Alzheimer's. This rollover CD would have been for $175k and they wouldn't budge on the rate. I asked for a check and left.)

    I thought about buying more guns. :)

  18. JustinJ

    JustinJ Well-Known Member

    My god, "the current regime...". Were u living under a rock until 2008?
  19. Drail

    Drail Well-Known Member

    Regarding confiscation or requiring owners to "turn in" their guns- years ago when I was an NRA instructor someone came up with a document that we all carried around with us everywhere we went and it essentially asked law enforcement persons if they were ordered to do gun confiscations "would you do it?" You could see them thinking about their answer. Every single one said they would resign before they would participate. It would be suicide to even try. Passing a law is easy. Enforcing it is entirely another matter. America faced this exact problem a couple hundred years ago and the fact that we were well armed was the only thing that put a stop to it.
  20. Tommygunn

    Tommygunn Well-Known Member

    Since when has "prohibitively expensive" ever dissuaded our noble government from doing anything to us?:evil:
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page