six 4 sure
Member
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.
six
six
When THEY come for YOUR guns...
- Thread starter DontShootMe
- Start date
- Status
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.
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!
Our right to maintain the ability to individually protect ourselves hangs by a very precarious thread!
longeyes
member
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?
children," threw most of our guns into the nearest large body of water
some time ago. Was I misinformed?
longeyes
member
Ironfist,
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.
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.
geekWithA.45
Moderator Emeritus
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.
redhead
Member
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?
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?
geekWithA.45
Moderator Emeritus
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.
longeyes
member
Geek,
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?"
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?"
meathammer
Member
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.)
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.
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.)
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.
geekWithA.45
Moderator Emeritus
longeyes:
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?
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
Member
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 “smartâ€-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 “assaultâ€-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 terrorâ€â€”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
Moparmike
Member
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.
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.
Kaylee
Member
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. 
In all seriousness, I think the debate IS going our way, in guns and in other things.
In all seriousness, I think the debate IS going our way, in guns and in other things.
BHPshooter
Member
I catch your drift
and agree wholeheartedly. 
Gordon, that is one of the best posts that I have ever seen.
Cheers,
Wes
Jaguar
Member
I think the federal government will use the slippery slope method. If you read this link here 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.
geekWithA.45
Moderator Emeritus
Sometimes, things turn around and go the right way.
Anyone remember prohibition?
It was a bad idea.
We got over it.
longeyes
member
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.
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.
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
Member
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.
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
Member
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!
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!
Kaylee
Member
Sounds like a little too much time with "The Turner Diaries" I think.
-K
brownie0486
Member
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?
Brownie
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?
Brownie
- Status