How they will take your Guns....

[Gordon Fink]

[T]he latest US military activities has added a whole new group of young people who have had exposure to firearms, so there is hope.

You do realize they are fighting a war with the express purpose of disarming a foreign state, don’t you? Either way, the military is really good at following orders.

However, the military won’t have to be involved, and a big law-enforcement effort won’t be needed—except possibly to pad the federal payroll. If the gun banners are wise, they will continue to seek a slow transition to European-style firearm prohibitions. Natural attrition will eventually accomplish the disarmament of law-abiding subjects without any dramatic, widespread confiscations.

~G. Fink

 

[Old Dog]

Whoa ... so are you then saying our whole form of government is a failure?

When does it finally become time to accept the ballot has failed? Why is the always trotted out old cliche of the ballot hailed as "making sense" no matter how long it fails?

Since the republic is founded on the principles of representation through voting ... Are you implying it's time to change the way we do business entirely since some folks haven't gotten the results they wanted from the politicians the majority has elected?

 

[Sindawe]

We have the means to effect change through the ballot first, instead of through the bullet. Why do we not exercise it?

I thought we did that when to obtained a GOP controlled House, Senate and Presidency. So in the past five years, how many gun control laws have been repealed?

Anyone? Anyone?

 

[Old Dog]

Natural attrition will eventually accomplish the disarmament of law-abiding subjects without any dramatic, widespread confiscations.

Exactly, and that's why it's so vital to continue efforts to educate our young people, bringing new shooters and potential gun-owners into the fold, developing new hunters, target and competition shooters ... We have a lot of work ahead, and we're continually fighting the anti-gun messages spread in the school systems, by the medial and all the subliminal anti-gun messages in pop culture (music, TV and the movies). But far better a calm, reasoned and intelligent RKBA message than continuing to spout confrontational lines such as "I hope I can take some of them with me," which serve only to portray us a trigger-happy, rebellious members of a lunatic fringe ...

I thought we did that when to obtained a GOP controlled House, Senate and Presidency. So in the past five years, how many gun control laws have been repealed?

I'd submit it all starts on the local and state level.

 

[30 cal slob]

Hmmph. Disclaimer here - this is just a hypothetical discussion. Hmmpph.

If you are worried that your local, state, and federal governments have some kind of gun records on you, then be pro-active (hypothetically of course).

Identify the relevent storage depots for these records NOW, be they hardcopy or digital. Keep these locations and their backups at the back of your mind, hypothetically, of course.

Whenever you get an inkling that somebody is gonna start banging on doors to come for your guns, then you hypothetically have carte blanche to go ahead and hypothetically destroy aforementioned records by any means necessary. Easier said than done, hypothetically speaking.

p.s. don't forget about dem 4473's.

 

[Zundfolge]

Remember that the BATF is an arm of the Treasury department and they control the IRS.

No they are not.

They where moved from under the Treasury Department to being under the Justice Department recently (within the last year or so).

They are no longer "tax collectors", they are now "cops".

EDIT
oops ... I missed DMF's post

 

[tyme]

Why are so many people quick to say "I'll give up my guns when yada, yada, yada.."

instead of,

"Well, next election, get off your duff and VOTE!!!!!"

No "protest" votes, just get the candidate who best represents our interests, and who has a hope in Hades of winning---and VOTE!!!!!

We have the means to effect change through the ballot first, instead of through the bullet. Why do we not exercise it?

Powderman, I think just about everyone here votes, and if they don't it's very probably for a well-thought-out reason. The problem remains that voting is not effective, because sheepism spreads faster than RKBA support.

Before someone replies to Sindawe, please remember that the AWB wasn't repealed. The sunset was built-in. It is not at all obvious that Congress would have successfully repealed it (they tried in... 1995, was it?) if it had lacked a sunset provision.

Since the republic is founded on the principles of representation through voting ... Are you implying it's time to change the way we do business entirely since some folks haven't gotten the results they wanted from the politicians the majority has elected?

This Republic was designed explicitly so that the majority didn't always get their way. The important thing is that all branches of government exercise only the power granted to them by the written constitution. The federal government, and many state governments, are already violating the social contract which constructed their respective constitutions. Theoretically, those governments are invalid. The only task remaining, in theory, should be to hold state and national constitutional conventions and create new governments. Of course, executing such a plan will accomplish nothing. Participants will be laughed at and lampooned on television, and if the conventions started to accomplish anything, they'd be shut down and participants would be hauled to prison.

Identify the relevent storage depots for these records NOW, be they hardcopy or digital. Keep these locations and their backups at the back of your mind, hypothetically, of course.

The BATFE routinely goes around collecting them. I'm guessing the documents are stored at BATFE headquarters, or in some document storage space jointly leased by the BATFE and a few other federal agencies. Unless you know someone at the BATFE, it's unlikely you'll be able to figure out their backup protocol. They may not even back up 4473s. If they do, do they enter them into a database or do they make microfilm copies?

 

[2nd Amendment]

They(ATF) where moved from under the Treasury Department to being under the Justice Department recently (within the last year or so).

The article in question is three years old...

 

[dustind]

Powderman: What evidence do you have that anyone who disagrees with you does not vote? Also voting, writing letters, and joining groups like the NRA does not really count as doing anything because it is expected. Working the political process requires extra effort above and beyond, which I imagine you do, as do most of the people here.

While working through the system is all well and good it has failed way too many times through out history to be the only thing that we rely on.

 

[2nd Amendment]

Whoa ... so are you then saying our whole form of government is a failure?

How does the relatively recent deterioration of the quality of our elected servants translate into the entire form of government being a failure?

Since the republic is founded on the principles of representation through voting ... Are you implying it's time to change the way we do business entirely since some folks haven't gotten the results they wanted from the politicians the majority has elected?

Are you saying that because a very slim majority of those who actually vote(an important distinction) placed in office people they thought were marginally better than the available alternative(another important distinction) that this makes it automatically correct?

I don't see how I am implying it is an overall failure of our system, just a failure at this time that may need drastic measures to correct. And at that, you didn't answer my questions at all...?

 

[Old Dog]

How does the relatively recent deterioration of the quality of our elected servants translate into the entire form of government being a failure?

Well, many students of U.S. history would note that opinions as to the quality of our elected servants have, as far back as Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Jackson, etc. not always been positive ... At any rate, if you posit that the product of our system is not representative of the will of the people, are you not then saying that our form of government does not work?

Are you saying that because a very slim majority of those who actually vote(an important distinction) placed in office people they thought were marginally better than the available alternative(another important distinction) that this makes it automatically correct?

No, but upon reflection, I don't see any systems out there that represent an improvement on what we have now.

don't see how I am implying it is an overall failure of our system,

Um, isn't that what you are implying here:

When does it finally become time to accept the ballot has failed?

when you say that the principle at the core of our system has failed?

 

[2nd Amendment]

No. A current failure does not mean an entire concept is voided. I don't see any claims made that historically our system and public servants have operated categorically against the best interests of this nation. We can always find examples of miserable failures, but they are note worthy because of their exception.

OTOH it does appear a large percentage of current reps do not have the best interests of the US in mind and may not even understand the concept, relative to their desire to further the best interests of globalist concerns. This is then a specific event, needing a specific reaction, not a condemnation of what has come before. Single person analogy: A man serves honorably in the military and then in his community but one day he snaps. Say he finds out his wife has cheated on him, or his business partner has robbed him blind, and he kills that person. Does this negate all he did before? Or is it simply a specific event we deal with in a specific way at that time?

Thus, I don't see how believing we may be arriving at a time when more drastic measures than the ballot box are called for, in reaction to current events, condemns the greatness of our system or prevents us from perhaps recapturing that greatness. Seems to me that rather than a condemnation it is instead an acknowledgement that we can still fix it, even if the fix isn't pretty or convenient.

 

[Old Dog]

Okay, 2A; I actually find myself in agreement with pretty much all you say in this post. Thanks.

 

[2nd Amendment]

Wow, that may be the first time I've ever felt like maybe I accomplished something online. Yer welcome!

 

[Zundfolge]

The problem remains that voting is not effective, because sheepism spreads faster than RKBA support.

I think that is a myth that us in the RKBA movement keep falling for.


Certainly America is less free and we have less access to our gun rights then we did in the late 1800s, but we HAVE reversed some of the anti gun trends.

I was born in 1969 and in that time:

• Handgun control has become a big movement that has been pretty much killed of.
  
• We went from 1 or 2 states where a serf could get a permit to carry IF they where well connected and/or rich to 35 states with shall issue, 9 with may issue and 2 completely free states (only 4 still prohibit CCW).
  
• An assault weapon ban was put in place with a sunset clause and that gun ban was allowed to sunset! ... that's pretty much unprecedented.
  
• The RKBA movement has grown from a few sportsmen and the occasional militia type to include people from all walks of life in all parts of the country (the growth of RKBA forums like this one are a testimony to that).

I know the pessimists (who think of themselves as "realists") don't see a brighter future, but frankly we are winning in the war against the antis ... 20-30 years ago outright bans of handguns seemed like a distinct possibility ... now many of us lawfully carry handguns concealed.

The antis are reduced to attacking .50BMG rifles and semi auto rifles with "evil features" and they are for the most part LOSING.



Now is the time for optimism tempered by vigilance ... not pessimism enhanced by fear.

 

[ksnecktieman]

I for one, do not expect that method for the confiscation of all firearms. My expectations are that they will take them piecemeal. First they will license and ban machine guns. Then they will license or ban having a weapon in your car where you can reach it. Then they will license or ban the carrying of a concealed pistol. Then they will license or ban fifty caliber rifles as military weapons. Then they will ban semi auto weapons. They will ban any firearm that will penetrate a kevlar vest. They will ban any gun that will hold more than ten rounds at a time They will ban any weapon with a removable magazine. They will tax or ban ammunition at any opportunity.

They will ban felons from owning firearms. They will ban anyone that has ever seen a phsychiatrist from owning one. They will ban anyone that has ever had a domestic dispute conviction from owning one. They will ban anyone from carrying one when he has had a drink, or if he is on any prescription medications. They will require us to get a firearms owners certiificate before we can buy one. They will require us to take safety courses before we can buy one, or carry one.

The plan is to license or ban only small portions of the firearms at any one time, with the reasonable expectation that there will never be a "right time to fight".

IMHO any of you duck hunters over fifty years old have nothing to worry about, your lifespan will be over before they get to your doubles, and over and unders, and you do not care to fight with me for my SKS, or my pocket pistol, or my right to carry it.

I am sure that we all support "our right to keep and bear arms"... The problem is that we have to support "the other guys right to keep and bear his arms of choice". We HAVE to stand together, or we will surely fall alone.

 

[Lobotomy Boy]

Back to the original post, it brings up some interesting hypothetical issues, the most important being that anyone who really would go underground and become part of an insurgency in this scenario would be pretty danged foolish to say so in a public forum like this.

 

[saltydog]

Keep in mind though that your own family and neighbors will be given lots of incentive to turn you in.

Not in my neighbor hood, everyone I live by is armed.

If the Govt decides to disarm the populas, they better put 1/2 the country on its payroll as the other 1/2 aint going to give up without a fight. If the same people, the govt tries to disarm, quits paying taxes, who's going to pay the payroll for the other 1/2? Everybody loose's in a Civil war. You think you have seen a bad economy in the past, huh, a thing like this will affect everyone. Things could get very complicated if that scenerio ever plays out

 

[Bill St. Clair]

beerslurpy said:

If the Fed bites US gun owners, US gunowners have the means to bite back. If this sort of monkeybusiness started on my watch, I would gladly render assistance to neighbors and friends. You dont have to wait for them to come for you to start doing the right thing.

Well, at least one guy got it right. Hopefully, our masters in DC know not to try an outright ban. I would interpret that as a declaration of war. An attempt to confiscate arms started the first American revolution. If they want to start another, that's a sure recipe.

 

[possenti]

No "protest" votes, just get the candidate who best represents our interests, and who has a hope in Hades of winning---and VOTE!!!!!

Then who "best represents our interests"? At least in the BIG 2 party system?

Bush? I doubt it.

 

[Standing Wolf]

I thought we did that when to obtained a GOP controlled House, Senate and Presidency. So in the past five years, how many gun control laws have been repealed?

I doubt it makes a great deal of difference whether statist parasites identify themself as Republicrats, Democans, or asparagus: they're still statist parasites.

 

[rock jock]

Dont you remember how many people were seriously getting ready to start an insurrection during the clinton/reno years? What do you think Oklahoma city was about? Everyone talks about killing children, but it was really about attacking the feds.

A few comments.

First, as bad as Cilinton was, his administration did not rise anywhere near the definition of tyranny. Insurrection against what? A concerted legislative effort against the AWB would have benn appropriate at that time, but I remember folks claiming that it was the end of "evil" rifles forever. Oh, but guess what, those rifles are perfectly legal again, so an insurrection would have been a little premature. If we had an insurrection everytime the socialists in this country got an edge up on us legislatively, we would be on the 100th or so civil war. Doesn't playing Chicken Little get a little tiring?

Second, if the insurrectionists in this future uprising identify the OK City bombing in any way as justified, they are as likely to be in my front sights as the gummit stormtroopers.

Finally, the tinhatters can present their case, but I will reserve judgement as to whether or not I think it is relevant, realistic, or even coherent, thank you very much. If I'm not going to be cowed into group think by Dan Blather, I'm certianly not going to be by a few arm-waving, hysterical, spittle-stained loons.

 

[2nd Amendment]

Well there's that tinhat label again. Pretty well voided the rest of the post.

 

[Alex45ACP]

LOL, the people who say "it will never happen here!" are so funny. What would these same people have said if I told them in advance what would happen on 9/11? Unless you've got a crystal ball, please don't try to tell me what's going to happen in the future...

 

[rock jock]

Well there's that tinhat label again. Pretty well voided the rest of the post.

I was referring to the author of the article. Of course, if you choose to adopt that label too, that's up to you.