Do you believe the U.S. Supreme Court will ever rule in favor of our "Assault Rifles"?

Tommygunn said:

Nevertheless, I believe many people will keep their guns -- some for the reason you state in your last sentence. Vindictive ex-wives are fully capable of getting ex spouses jailed without gun issues; all they need is yell "RAPE!" or he didn't pay alimony.
There's always dangers in civil disobediance. Some of us are willing to accept those risks.
Some (Ishmaelites) are not.

Click to expand...

I see a lot of this kind of talk on gun forums.

The truth is most of the people who say these things don't have a criminal record of any type.

A lot of them have permits to carry concealed, pay their taxes, go to work everyday, hold no contraband and are generally model citizens.

I guess one has to ask themselves how connected they really are with civil disobedience or if they have ever been involved in any action that resulted in their arrest. My guess is it isn't something they've experienced.

Drail said:

I believe that there was when the Founders wrote the Constitution.

Click to expand...

Don’t be naive. They argued about the words just like we do.

D.B. Cooper said:

I would strongly disagree with that concept.

Click to expand...

Perhaps I should have said, “...that we can know.” What good is truth if we can’t know it. Or if we think we know it, but don’t agree with others about what it is. The end result is the same as no truth at all.

denton said:

Well, that's true if anything ever was.

Still, I'm fairly optimistic. I think we'll get another new Justice before long, and I think we'll get decisions that we like more than not.

Click to expand...

On this one topic. What about the decisions you won't like about other things?

CoalTrain49 said:

I see a lot of this kind of talk on gun forums.

The truth is most of the people who say these things don't have a criminal record of any type.

A lot of them have permits to carry concealed, pay their taxes, go to work everyday, hold no contraband and are generally model citizens.

I guess one has to ask themselves how connected they really are with civil disobedience or if they have ever been involved in any action that resulted in their arrest. My guess is it isn't something they've experienced.

Click to expand...

People who have criminal records are usually disqualified from gun ownership.

All my life I have obeyed the laws, payed my taxes (even though some of them I believed either unjust, or, more often, too high) and gone to work. One does not run to to the castle walls and climb the ramparts with broken bourbon bottles for light or trivial reasons. Also, throughout my life, I've always been able to vote and redress a grievance by that method, or living with the grievance when I could not.
But in my 63 years of life I have NEVER seen "democratic socialists" become as prominent as they now are, nor have I ever seen polls indicate socialism being held in the relative high regard it is. I don't think I've ever heard a Eric Swalwell talk so blithely about an abject confiscation, and willingness to kill resisters.

The socialist movement may pass. I hope it does, but I do not vest any hope that the people will reject it, because I have little faith or hope in the voters----ESPECIALLY THE MILLENIAL VOTERS, who will be an increasing demographic of registered voters soon.
Many law abiding people have little experience with civil disobediance because they ARE law abiding.
But one should never assume that people claiming they will engage in such disobediance are issuing empty words. They obey laws because they believe in justice, but BECAUSE THEY BELIEVE IN JUSTICE, they despise unjust and clearly unconstitutional laws.

Pray for the peaceful resolution. It's the best for our country.

Tommygunn said:

People who have criminal records are usually disqualified from gun ownership.

Click to expand...

Felonies, not misdemeanors. There is a bit of a difference. My point is if you are the person you say you are, and I believe you are, you aren't one prone to "civil disobedience". Especially having no criminal record. Most of those who demonstrate, hold contraband (illegal possession), and riot are the ones who will defy legal authority, not guys like you and me.

More than likely, if a federal law is passed to register semi-auto rifles, you will comply, just like you do with everything else you find objectionable that the fed does like run a back ground check on you and tax you when you purchase of a new firearm. Maybe not, I don't know you, but my guess is you're too old to go to prison, I know I am.

If you think I will not resist a registration/confiscation law .... you do not know me.

Civil disobediance may not be the ONLY thing I do ....but it WILL BE ONE OF THE THINGS I DO.

CoalTrain49 said:

More than likely, if a federal law is passed to register semi-auto rifles, you will comply, just like you do with everything else you find objectionable that the fed does like run a back ground check on you and tax you when you purchase of a new firearm. Maybe not, I don't know you, but my guess is you're too old to go to prison, I know I am.

Click to expand...

Registration of firearms has NO purpose besides facilitation of future CONFISCATION.

Registration is like the yellow Star of David, a WARNING of what's to come.

Tommygunn said:

If you think I will not resist a registration/confiscation law .... you do not know me.

Civil disobediance may not be the ONLY thing I do ....but it WILL BE ONE OF THE THINGS I DO.

Click to expand...

They don't WANT to know you, just as the Japanese didn't want to know my parents' generation. They have convinced themselves that there will be no resistance, because to examine the likely results of what they plan is too terrible for them to contemplate.

CoalTrain49 said:

More than likely, if a federal law is passed to register semi-auto rifles, you will comply,

Click to expand...

I'm old enough to vividly remember the 1968 MG amnesty. (At the time, I was a 23-year-old who was already heavily into the gun scene.) There was talk around the gun shops by some oldsters that may have had WW2 bringback MGs, that they would not register, fearing a future confiscation. Well, we all know how that turned out. The ones that registered (or their heirs) have guns worth fortunes, while the ones that didn't register have worthless contraband.

The point at which civil disobedience would be appropriate would be when faced with actual confiscation, not with mere registration. I wouldn't break the law until it became clear how it was playing out.

Oh, my!

AlexanderA said:

The point at which civil disobedience would be appropriate would be when faced with actual confiscation, not with mere registration. I wouldn't break the law until it became clear how it was playing out.

Click to expand...

Registration of firearms has NO purpose beyond facilitation of future confiscation.

Like the yellow Star of David, it's a "tell"...

AlexanderA said:

I'm old enough to vividly remember the 1968 MG amnesty. (At the time, I was a 23-year-old who was already heavily into the gun scene.) There was talk around the gun shops by some oldsters that may have had WW2 bringback MGs, that they would not register, fearing a future confiscation. Well, we all know how that turned out. The ones that registered (or their heirs) have guns worth fortunes, while the ones that didn't register have worthless contraband.

The point at which civil disobedience would be appropriate would be when faced with actual confiscation, not with mere registration. I wouldn't break the law until it became clear how it was playing out.

Click to expand...

Correct. I know a guy who has exactly what you have described, An MP43. He registered it in 68 based on the advice of his attorney. He purchased it in a private sale with the paperwork of a bring back for cheap. He said he didn't know it was contraband when he bought it and I believe him because I know the guy pretty well. He still has it. Who knows what it's worth, my guess is way more than I would be willing to pay for it even though it's registered. It isn't for sale anyway. Unregistered it's just contraband and only a fool would try to buy it or even try to sell it. Hot potato.

Here's a good explanation of the 68 amnesty.



And confiscation of a legally owned firearm is illegal.

CoalTrain49 said:

Correct. I know a guy who has exactly what you have described, An MP43. He registered it in 68 based on the advice of his attorney. He purchased it in a private sale with the paperwork of a bring back for cheap. He said he didn't know it was contraband when he bought it and I believe him because I know the guy pretty well. He still has it. Who knows what it's worth, my guess is way more than I would be willing to pay for it even though it's registered. It isn't for sale anyway. Unregistered it's just contraband and only a fool would try to buy it or even try to sell it. Hot potato.

Here's a good explanation of the 68 amnesty.



And confiscation of a legally owned firearm is illegal.

Click to expand...

Your thinking is flawed, both you and Alexander. Yes, the 1968 deal made some people’s guns worth small fortunes over a period of time. But, they are only worth anything as long as those that made you register them grant you the option to own them. Once they outlaw them completely, which would no doubt come if they outlawed semi autos, then they’d be absolutely worthless. And, they’d know exactly where to come get it. With that being said, I’d be surprised if the ATF was able to literally keep up Witt every suppressor, SBR or MG out there. Some of these weapons have been around almost 100 years, some have been registered for 50 and there would be some tracking down even of those registered. Most only require you to notify if you move out of the state. I know people who have moved 20 times in a couple decades, still within the state so they never notified the atf of their moves.

SilentStalker said:

Your thinking is flawed, both you and Alexander. Yes, the 1968 deal made some people’s guns worth small fortunes over a period of time. But, they are only worth anything as long as those that made you register them grant you the option to own them. Once they outlaw them completely, which would no doubt come if they outlawed semi autos, then they’d be absolutely worthless. And, they’d know exactly where to come get it. With that being said, I’d be surprised if the ATF was able to literally keep up Witt every suppressor, SBR or MG out there. Some of these weapons have been around almost 100 years, some have been registered for 50 and there would be some tracking down even of those registered. Most only require you to notify if you move out of the state. I know people who have moved 20 times in a couple decades, still within the state so they never notified the atf of their moves.

Click to expand...

Do you have a concealed carry permit? If you do they know you have at least one firearm and where to find it. Do you live in a POC state? They have a record of you and the firearm you purchased from an FFL. There is no law that says a state can't keep those records and they do.

CoalTrain49 said:

Do you have a concealed carry permit? If you do they know you have at least one firearm and where to find it. Do you live in a POC state? They have a record of you and the firearm you purchased from an FFL. There is no law that says a state can't keep those records and they do.

Click to expand...

Ohio doesn't require CHL holders to own a gun.

The vast majority of my firearms were purchased in private sales. The government has no idea what guns I own or where they are. That's by DESIGN.

CoalTrain49 said:

Do you have a concealed carry permit? If you do they know you have at least one firearm and where to find it. Do you live in a POC state? They have a record of you and the firearm you purchased from an FFL. There is no law that says a state can't keep those records and they do.

Click to expand...

I live in free country. My concealed carry doesn’t mean that it’s necessarily my weapon. Also, the atf would have you believe that they don’t keep records, remember? I know this to be false tho. And ffls are only required to keep the records for 10 years. So technically speaking, no they don’t necessarily know what I own. My state doesn’t require me to go to an FFL to sell or buy from an individual within the state.

I have some things that have gone through an FFL but I could have just as easily sold those privately. Not to mention I know several groups of people doing what the Canadians did when they implemented their registration standards, by design of course. Canada found out quickly how bad of an idea this registration crap was.

Oh, and some of the records at one FFL were destroyed in a fire awhile back. So...unless the atf wants to admit they keep or copy records, those are lost forever.

AlexanderA said:

I'm old enough to vividly remember the 1968 MG amnesty. (At the time, I was a 23-year-old who was already heavily into the gun scene.) There was talk around the gun shops by some oldsters that may have had WW2 bringback MGs, that they would not register, fearing a future confiscation. Well, we all know how that turned out. The ones that registered (or their heirs) have guns worth fortunes, while the ones that didn't register have worthless contraband.

The point at which civil disobedience would be appropriate would be when faced with actual confiscation, not with mere registration. I wouldn't break the law until it became clear how it was playing out.

Click to expand...

Very good point, AlexanderA.

Deanimator said:

Registration of firearms has NO purpose beyond facilitation of future confiscation.

Click to expand...

Would you have said that in 1934, when the NFA was first enacted? Or in 1968, with the MG amnesty? There hasn't been confiscation yet of the items registered on those occasions. In fact the registration has given them an additional layer of legal protection.

I'm not in favor of registration. However, if it happens, it's not the end of the world. (My MG's are already registered at both the federal and state levels. I'm honestly not expecting a knock on the door with the authorities coming to take them.)

AlexanderA said:

Would you have said that in 1934, when the NFA was first enacted? Or in 1968, with the MG amnesty? There hasn't been confiscation yet of the items registered on those occasions. In fact the registration has given them an additional layer of legal protection.

I'm not in favor of registration. However, if it happens, it's not the end of the world. (My MG's are already registered at both the federal and state levels. I'm honestly not expecting a knock on the door with the authorities coming to take them.)

Click to expand...

I wouldn't have expected Sobibor in 1933 either. If you open the door, you don"t get to whine about walks in.

Would you care to tell the class how Chicago implemented its handgun BAN?

CoalTrain49 said:

Do you have a concealed carry permit? If you do they know you have at least one firearm and where to find it. Do you live in a POC state? They have a record of you and the firearm you purchased from an FFL. There is no law that says a state can't keep those records and they do.

Click to expand...

I just received my renewal from for my C&R. Although I've had one for 6 years, I've never bought a gun with it, but ATF still has my name on a list.

Deanimator said:

Ohio doesn't require CHL holders to own a gun.

The vast majority of my firearms were purchased in private sales. The government has no idea what guns I own or where they are. That's by DESIGN.

Click to expand...

I know that. I don't know any state that does. That wasn't the question. The question was "do you have a concealed carry permit".

Maybe your firearms aren't registered but if you have a permit you're registered. That's really all they need to know.

Registration of a firearm doesn't really mean much in the general scheme of things. We have a pistol registration here. I can legally sell a pistol that was registered with the state. There is no law that says I have to report that sale when I no longer own the pistol. About the only way LE can track that is thru a dealer. Our state is several years behind getting the pistol data into their database so In effect, it's worthless.

Probably more important to LE is your carry permit. They keep that up to date. In this state when the state patrol runs my vehicle license plate my CPL comes up. I know because a WSP officer told me that.

CoalTrain49 said:

Looks like you avoided the question so I'll just assume you have a concealed carry permit unless of course you tell me you don't.

Maybe your firearms aren't registered but you are. That's all they need to know.

Click to expand...

And what does that tell them?

And what will they do with it?

Deanimator said:

And what does that tell them?

And what will they do with it?

Click to expand...

Who knows. I guess that's up to the state.

AlexanderA said:

There hasn't been confiscation yet of the items registered on those occasions.

Click to expand...

CA confiscated rifles (90s) by use of thier registration.

One aspect of that registration was to protect the legal gun owner and thier now legal gun.

However, the registration was used to confiscate the protected gun from the protected owner.


So while it wasn't one of the occasions you mentioned, it has happened in fairly recent history.