Wait a second...

It all depends on the bill that passes, there are many possibilities.

Off hand, and by no means a complete list

1) You get to keep the ones you have and can sell them to others.
2) You get to keep the ones you have and must register them ( if they are not already depending on where you live),possibly as NFA weapons. (Remember "streetsweeper"?)
3)You get to keep the ones you have but you cannot sell them to anyone and when you die they get destroyed
4) You must turn them in for destruction/"storage"
5) various combinations of the above

Most likely there will be some sort of "grandfathering" to allow you to keep what you have. If they take it they will have to pay something for it.

As I said it all depends on the bill.

NukemJim

Yep it depends how the law is written. I would doubt it will be confisication (right away)
The "expected" is they will do the "No mags over 10 rds made after Feb. 1 2009" All those made before are "grandfathered" in.
Then in late summer no more semi auto guns that are CAPABLE of holding mags of more then 10 rds (some say 6 rd might be goal)
Of course you will have to REGISTER them within 30 days to keep them legal/NOT be allowed to sell/trade/loan them to anyone. (but you can have them so no problem right?)
By late winter ALL guns will have to be registered. (after all they have not confisicated any so that arguement can't be used) Well summer 2010 they find reason to outlaw all semi autos that (could) hold more then 10 rds (remember they have lists of everyone) They will pay (fair market value) Say $300 for colt AR and $200 for other brands and $100 for SKS/MAK/AK types. Anyone who fails to turn them in will be a domestic terrorist and held without trial/all their stuff/bank accounts taken (to pay welfare)
Most folks think I am too optimistic. That I always see a silver lining. So odds are it will be worse.

May I assume.

Hey There;
May I assume that some one has forgoten about the second ammendment ?
That is when you get to go out in your back yard and dig them up.

Hey There;
May I assume that some one has forgoten about the second ammendment ?
That is when you get to go out in your back yard and dig them up.

Click to expand...

yeah but if it takes 3 years to go through the courts to have them say that it was not valid it still does you no good.

Here's my financial tip of the day.
Buy stocks in cosmoline.

2A and court?

Hey There:
I don't mean to be mean. But The reason we have the 2A is so they can not take it away. Court or no court. Why would anyone accecpt that. ??????

Lets get this right.

Hey agian;
So let me understand you . You guys are saying our 2A is only good until it is legislated out.

I guess that is not how I see it. The 2A was put in place so our government could not take it away. Nor step too hard on other rights.

This is intersting to see how some gun owners veiw this.

This is intersting to see how some gun owners veiw this.

Click to expand...

Well let's be honest here, that "cold dead hands" thing hasn't worked in DC, Illinois, California, New York, New Jersey...........

If Obama wins and gets a few of his cronies into the supreme court it's gonna be a sad time.:banghead:

QUOTE]Hey There;
May I assume that some one has forgoten about the second ammendment ?
[/QUOTE]

Look how Obama's trying to censure the NRA from challenging his gun control stance even though he has voted in favor of every piece of gun control legislation in the last eight years. Look at what he is doing in Missouri, threatening lawsuits if there is any mention of his christian??? religion.
I am sure that if Obama is elected that he will have a special squad to do door to door gun collections as he has supposedly supported. Could this be the purpose of the civilian army that he has proposed?

Folks,

Right now our feeders at the public trough have a lot more on their plates to worry about, that will assure them of votes, than an AWB.

Right now and for at least the next 18 months to 2 years the only response to any firearms control vote will be "What about my house, what about my job, what about my 401K, what about terrorism, what about Iraq, what about healthcare etc etc"

Doesn't mean that some of the more rabid [cough] Pelosi [cough], [cough] Weinstein [cough] wouldn't like to, just that it's not in their personal interest right now.

If/When/Once the Chicago gun case goes through and assuming we get incorporation, then the amount of political capital necessary to be expended to push a comprehensive AWB in against clear Supreme Court ruling would be prohibitive.

The biggest practical worry is not an AWB from the federal government it's incremental "reasonable rules and regulations" addition at the state level. Expansion of ammunition serialization, firearms serialization stamping magazine capacity restrictions, Firearms ID card requirements, permit to purchase requirements etc etc. All this and no political capital expenditure at the federal level and all skirting around the SC's Heller rulings.

So I might seem kinda uninformed but let me get something straight.

Obama would most likely have an AWB (if it gets passed)
McCain would not?

Thank you, that is all

I think it is more of a case where Obama has promised to sell gun control, and McCain is more or less offering to ignore the issue unless congress hands him something to sign.

I would not mistake either candidate as being pro-gun, but at this point apathy is all you can get with a presidential vote.

Which makes court efforts all the more important to get the issue off of the table for presidential types.

Well let's be honest here, that "cold dead hands" thing hasn't worked in DC, Illinois, California, New York, New Jersey...........

Click to expand...

That's 'cause no one has stood there, armed, during a confiscation and actually pulled the trigger. It's good that it gets said; better if it gets done. Ever notice how these gun bans never include confiscation?

Woody

"Knowing the past, I'll not surrender any arms and march less prepared into the future." B.E.Wood

The Second Amendment can be legislated out!

Just like the fact that they can legislate the fact that all politicians can steal your wife and daughters for their own sex slaves at any time.

Like they can legislate the fact that they can shoot you on site, just because they don't like the color of your skin or hair.

They can pass any "law" they want. They can enforce any "law" they can get useful idiots to enforce.

It will be a matter of what "laws" the Americans chose to obey.

The folks of 1775 made that choice, heck Rosa Parks made that choice.

Are today's "Americans" capable of making that choice?

It is either "We the People..." or it is "We the Subjects...."

Where this all leads us, as far as "cold dead hands", or "violent revolution" is not up to us, it is up to those that want to rule as tyrants.

When that stop respecting the Ballot Box, we may have to select a different box to speak from.

First such legislation would have to make it through Congress. With a lot of Dems elected on pro-2A platforms recently, that ain't gonna happen.

There just isn't the will among politicians, who see it--correctly--as a losing issue, to pass this kind of stuff.

May I assume that some one has forgoten about the second ammendment ?
That is when you get to go out in your back yard and dig them up.

Click to expand...

And then what? Until I see dead gun grabbers, your quote is meaningless.

I seem to recall that someone (Rodney William Ansell) did in Australia some years back when they were confiscating guns there. He died and the guns still got confiscated and nothing changed.

Click to expand...

Im guessing he shot at the wrong folks. He aimed for the peons not the ones responsible.

-T

Obama would most likely have an AWB (if it gets passed)
McCain would not?

Click to expand...

McCain may or may not be pro-gun if he gets in there. Obama's anti-gun record is clear. Heck, he picked the author of the 1994 "assault weapons" ban for his VP.
The previous AWB allowed people to keep their existing guns. The results were fantastic in the eyes of the supporters: crime didn't drop and prices for the "preban" guns skyrocketed overnight. Of course, it also cost the Democrats control of the house and senate.
Any new ban would probably move existing guns to NFA or forbid transferring if they really wanted to stick it to (the law abiding, not criminal) owners.
Who knows what would happen if they tried to take it that far but they know doing it incrementally is the key to avoid upsetting too many people at one given time. It probably also depends on how much of the spirit, commitment and courage of the founders still lives in today's citizens. A lot of people are quick to hand over their freedom.

fiddletown: Could you get some sources on your statement about Rodney William Ansell? From what I can tell, he went on his rampage for other reasons, possibly on drugs, and not because he wanted to resist guns being confiscated. You don't go shooting up random houses to violently protest gun confiscation.