Resist Evil
Member
Level Head, I appreciate your effort in the blog. Thank you.
Like Button.................I live here in missouri I only wish I was old enough to vote. These idiots will not stop until they have blood on their hands will they? I'm not saying its to that point but it is getting there. Cowards who set behind a desk with their families protected by body guards will not tell me what i need or dont need to protect myself or my loved ones. You want my guns? Then hold a constitutional convention other wise they can cram that piece of paper up their @$$. I'm already tired of this crap.
Just because they are incompetent, doesn't mean they won't try!I don't see it (confiscation) happening.If they can't stop drugs from being sold or 11 million illegqals out,they are not competent to confiscate 200 t0 500 million gunz.
...I also do not agree that the majority of police officers would go along with an order to confiscate. We have seen with the threat and passage of new gun laws a lot of police and sheriff departments making a public point of stating that they will not enforce the laws. This is an issue which is being forced to the light, and with other incidents like what happened in New Orleans being brought to light, it is more difficult to be ignorant or indifferent to the idea.
I have discussed with my commanding officer, and he concurs, that orders to confiscate arms from law-abiding citizens are illegal, immoral, and unethical, and should not be obeyed. We would rather face the short-term consequences of disobeying the order, than the long-term consequences of following them.
__________________
Just because the laws won't reduce crime, doesn't mean they won't pass them.
Some folks have been predicting the confiscation of guns since before JFK was murdered in 1963
http://www.newrepublic.com/blog/plank/111266/franklin-roosevelt-the-father-gun-control#Adam Winkler, "Franklin Roosevelt: The Father of Gun Control", The New Republic, 19 Dec 2012.
Gun control is one of the great pieces of unfinished business for the Democratic Party. ... Like health care, social security, and so many other issues central to the Democratic agenda, the party's support for gun control stems from Franklin D. Roosevelt. ... Roosevelt's original proposal for what would become the National Firearms Act of 1934, the first federal gun control law, sought to tax all firearms and establish a national registry of guns.
I also do not agree that the majority of police officers would go along with an order to confiscate. We have seen with the threat and passage of new gun laws a lot of police and sheriff departments making a public point of stating that they will not enforce the laws. This is an issue which is being forced to the light, and with other incidents like what happened in New Orleans being brought to light, it is more difficult to be ignorant or indifferent to the idea.
I have discussed with my commanding officer, and he concurs, that orders to confiscate arms from law-abiding citizens are illegal, immoral, and unethical, and should not be obeyed. We would rather face the short-term consequences of disobeying the order, than the long-term consequences of following them.
I disagree. How can you possibly ignore the contributions of Teddy Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson and FDR? Heck, toss in Truman's Fair Deal, too.
Then, why don't they act like him? JFK had more in common with Reagan, if you ask me. Both had the same idea of raising revenue and that was to cut taxes rather than today's liberals' idea of "never enough taxes." The idea was to let the working man keep more of his paycheck and clean up when he proudly poured his hard-earned bucks into the economy. It worked both times.I'm not ignoring them. I said "modern" liberalism. The current crop of liberals in control were almost all disciples of JFK.
You need to look up the definition of the term modern liberalism.
I don't see it (confiscation) happening.If they can't stop drugs from being sold or 11 million illegqals out,they are not competent to confiscate 200 t0 500 million gunz.