• You are using the old High Contrast theme. We have installed a new dark theme for you, called UI.X. This will work better with the new upgrade of our software. You can select it at the bottom of any page.

Gun buyout: how much wlll the .Gov have to pay?

Status
Not open for further replies.
It isn't going to happen. These leading threads trouble me.... confiscation, tipping point,..... I mean do you expect members to say on line that they are willing to become felons and not follow the law..... Already, interest in more gun control laws by the general public is on the wane. The gun control advocates will be lucky to get universal background checks.
 
Uh, as a tax payer, there isn't enough of my own money in the world they could pay me to sell my guns. I'm also darn-sure not selling them to foreign bond-holders who'd have me executed for owning them :rolleyes:

TCB
 
22-rimfire said:
I mean do you expect members to say on line that they are willing to become felons and not follow the law.....
Click to expand...

The majority of public didn't advertise their intent on frequenting in speakeasies before the prohibition, but pretty much everybody knew what was about to happen. The do-gooders who advocated prohibition were more or less the only ones who chose not to face the fact that civil disobedience will be widespread. Whenever laws contradict the common sense of justice harshly enough, there's little question about the consequences.

Enforcing a highly unpopular, even unconstitutional law by brute force has repercussions, one of which is that the government will run out of police officers before the goal is reached.
 
The Australian's didn't confiscate. They bought 'em using the tax payer's money to the tune of $230 million AUD.
Click to expand...
Australia did indeed confiscate. The taking was mandatory, and under duress, backed by threat of force. The fact that the Australian administration gave owners a pittance as political cover doesn't make it not confiscation.
 
Odds are that each and every gun owner could go to court to establish fair market value for each and every firearm of his possession. Buy stock in Fjestad, 'cause the Blue Book will be a really popular item.

It's not just the cost of firearms that would hurt the government. Consider the government's court costs. Sure, it's taxpayer money, but it comes out of the budget for that fiscal year.

Then figure just how many hours per suit, per court, per year. It would tie up every federal court in the country and negatively impact civil cases as well as all the criminal cases.

Be like trying to empty a swimming pool with a teaspoon.

As far as "all guns": In 1967/1968, the estimate was maybe 200 million guns in the US. From 1993-2003, BATF showed five million per year. Since then, the rate of sales has notably increased. From 2004 to now? Probably an average of eight million per year. I'm guessing maybe three million per year from 1969-1992,

So: A grand total of probably 400 million guns in private ownership here in the US.
 
benEzra said:
Australia did indeed confiscate. The taking was mandatory, and under duress, backed by threat of force. The fact that the Australian administration gave owners a pittance as political cover doesn't make it not confiscation.
Click to expand...

This is important to remember and to mention whenever possible. Do not use the term "buyback" when discussing this with Anti-Constitutionalists, always re-phrase as confiscation.

Also, despite Fauxgressive pretense that they are Super Smart®, they don't actually mentally grasp the sheer number of guns in the USA. If you do the math you will quickly discover that if police were able to confiscate 1000 guns nationally every day, it would take 900 years to confiscate them all.
 
Last edited:
Paying banic prices would be too much for the fed to afford. $1200 for what they'd pay $500 for? Puh-leesse.
 
Sorry, they don't have enough money to buy my Constitutional rights no matter how much they're willing to pay.
 
If the payment was zero, the cost to search door to door would be unbearable. Each one found would need to be inventoried, catalogued, transported, destroyed and verified. The per each cost is insane even without any compensation to the owner. If a single turncoat traitor expires when performing a raid at mr john wayne Americas house, the family will be compensated for their loss. The per each cost just rose enormously. exemptions will become political currency. Politicians, their family and friends, police, their family and friends, bankers, their families, judges, lawyers, gunsmiths, military, mercenaries, etc will all need their guns. It will not work at once. Piecemeal state by state is more likely
 
They won't have to buy them back. When the grabbers get a Congress and a line up of Supreme Court Justices all in their favor, a simple stroke of the pen will ban most everything. Then we fight it in the courts to the top but get over ruled by their hand picked "justice league". Many/most will turn them in voluntarily, the few hold outs will be driven underground, and our collective might against tyranny will be just a shadow.
 
The courts? The courts have failed us, there's only one way to stop any attempt and that is to fight, if you are unwilling to act on your words than the Constitution which many men and women literally bled and died for means nothing, even if I am alone I will give the best fight I can. Good luck on your courts.... Only two boxes ever solve anything the ballot and the bullet and the ballot.
 
Last edited:
"Odds are that each and every gun owner could go to court to establish fair market value for each and every firearm of his possession"
"Paying banic prices would be too much for the fed to afford"

These two things are not unconnected; like I said earlier, they are paying you with your own money. That is to say, it is not possible for the government to justly compensate a whole third or half of the population with tax money; the value is enormously marginalized by the tax we'd all have to pay to perform the confiscation. Unlike normal, limited confiscation by way of due process (ideally), this isn't the type of thing that can be defrayed across everyone else; we're talking the entire nation paying 500$ to themselves, and then taking a nearly equal value of money.

Even if it were funded with bonds, as we saw with quantitative easing, this still has an inflationary (i.e. indirect confiscation) effect on the value of the money being doled out. I'm not a game-theory genius or economics doctor, but it seems like the most basic rules of capitalism make it pretty much impossible for a closed system to buy itself out of a market (which is what the mandatory, universal buybacks purport to do).

Therefore we must not treat these proposals as anything but a taking at the point of a gun; and such a realization should hopefully make the stakes for all involved abundantly clear. It appears theoretically impossible for this policy concept to function justly.

TCB
 
Just in the one month after Sandy Hook.....2 million guns were sold. In ONE month.

Obama has put more guns on the street than any other President in history. Putting his face on T.V is purely counter-productive, lol.
 
hq said:
Don't forget accessories and ammo which will become redundant once the guns are gone. In practise it'll easily double or triple the required sum, all the way up to one trillion or more.
Click to expand...
No no no, most of those bullets have lead in them and flammable components! They represent a danger to the environment! Thus, they'll have to be turned over to the proper authorities for appropriate disposal free of charge.
 
Most of the estimates show at least 300 million guns. I personally think it's much higher, but it's a good low end.

At $200 a gun, that's $60 billion. That's 3 NASA's or a spare Department of Homeland Security.

If we went after it War on Terror style ($5 trillion, is it?), we could spend almost $17,000 per gun.
 
I'm not sure I understand the purpose of this thread. You don't actually think the government would ask us before they do anything, right? If a law was passed that guns had to be turned in, everyone who obliges would either be compensated something, or nothing - and wouldn't have any say in the matter. I guess it's interesting to consider, but is there value in this conversation? Something beneficial we can take away from it? If so, I'm missing it.

Honestly, my thoughts are along the lines of this: if this ever happens - whether or not there's a recompense afforded to gun owners - hopefully only a fraction of people would go along with it. As for the rest of Americans, hopefully they'd make the next day one for the history books, because the alternative would be sitting around waiting to be wrangled up. Once that happens... those rights aren't coming back.

I think that's probably the best take-away possible from this thread.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

A
  • Locked
How much did the manufacture pay for these supplies!?? - $1mil gun
Replies
9
Views
1K
4thPointOfContact
4
M
  • Locked
Watch The U.n. Gun Debate On Pay-per-view!
2
Replies
25
Views
2K
RevDisk
R
G
  • Locked
Warranty issue.....
Replies
2
Views
310
General Geoff
General Geoff
K
  • Locked
How much will you pay for Customer Service.
2
Replies
28
Views
937
Technosavant
T
N
  • Locked
Gun Control and US foverseas Military spending.
Replies
2
Views
457
dewage83
D
Back
Top