So what if they come get our guns.

Status
Not open for further replies.
I dont value my guns nearly as much as I value the lives of service people and the memories of terror victims. I would willingly revert to a sharp stick if we could have a leader who led, and listened to his cabinet and military. Bush's foreign policy was well conceived, and then he decided not to listen to Colin and Condi, but now we have the comedy team of Rumsfeld and Cheney trying to make a sow's ear out of a silk purse. I have'nt seen this much tap dancing since Fred was Singin' in the Rain. Osama is still loose and Ashcroft dreams of the good life at Gitmo, where that Constitution thing doesnt get in the way.....

Not voting for Bush is not the same as voting for Kerry. There is more to life than guns (gasp!) I refuse to be a single issue voter, especially after Bush's non-handling of the AWB

I know I wont vote for Kerry, but if he wins, I'm patient. Remember the uproar when the AWB first passed? And then what happened?
 
Then vote for Kerry -- kiss your guns goodbye, say goodbye to health care -- Teresa will be in control of that and NOT heating homes for the eldery. Yes, what a sweetie she is....:barf: Leave the U.S., join France now, and let Osama know whatever he wants is okay by you. Let's all just complain about Bush, vote for someone that won't win, or join Kerry in a chorus of Kum Bai Ya....

While you're at it, it might be time to open that account with Canada and buy your drugs while you can. Again, Teresa's record is just so lovely....no wonder Hollywood adores...her, who never worked a day in her life -- literally. And she insults the First Lady, who's more of a lady in reality so I'm still voting for Laura and George.
 
Yes! Finally! Someone brought out the "If you dont vote for bush then you are a terrorist" argument!
 
If I was Bin Laden -- who would I fear? A president with the stones to do what's right for the safety of innocents....or a man who's opposed to every weapon the U.S. owns and won't make a move if it's unpopular and doesn't have France's approval? How could you be opposed to every weapon the U.S. military owns and STILL claim to be the "terrorism president?" No thanks, I don't want to wait for another attack to see what Kerry will do. I'm FROM Massachusetts so I've seen him in action first hand. If only I could vote for Bush more than once...
 
In an attempt to repel a thread hijack, let me rephrase my original question.

To those who concern themselves with ". . . . they will come get our guns. . . " I ask a simple question: What do you expect to happen subsequent to "come get our guns. . ."

They (you define the term) have come after our freedom of political speech and imposed limitations. They have saddled us with politically correct speech and hate speech, yet as far as I can tell nothing has happened.

They (you define the term) chip away at the fourth amendment, some say. No indication of anything happening after the chips fall.

What is going to happen once all our wicked and nasty guns are safely out of our hands?
 
When "evil guns" are out of good people's hands, history has demonostrated what follows: Nazi occupation and muder of inferior people, millions of innocent children, students, etc. just "disappear" in Argentina's Dirty War, Pol Pot's solution known as the "Killing Fields," millions of dead by oppressive governments as seen in Stalin's Russia and Mao's China. In short, when guns are a privledge to a chosen few and not a right of the people -- nothing good ever comes of it.

Anti's like to say that people who own guns are a bunch of right wing extremists and religious nuts. Well, let's see....:rolleyes: this country was based on the lifestyle and teachings of the Pilgrims when they landed in Plymouth. They left to escape religious persecution so they could be free to persecute everyone else....religious nuts...

When this country took up arms against the British, we forced them out of the "Colonies" and subsequently become a country unto ourselves and eventually a world power. So, we became a United States because of right wing extremists.... Liberals don't see it that way though and they'll be the first to tell you "That was different!" I don't see how but then I don't think with my head up my....well, you know. ;)
 
What do you expect to happen subsequent to "come get our guns.
Click to expand...

News, blogs and forums not "approved as in the publics interest" being shut down.

Manditory .gov issued ID papers or some other means of identification for any employment or financial transaction, even buying a frelling candy bar.

Elimination of "cash" in any form, those who use it will be classified as suspect and enemies of the public good.

Increased levels of taxation on all forms of income, additions of taxes for personal property for states that do not yet have such.

Controled distribution of food stocks, checked against .gov ID database to ensure "hording" does not take place.

Removal of people from "Dangerous rural areas" for their own good, moved to transitiononal processing centers and cities.

Children removed from the family home for their own good, so that they can be properly raised and educated to be good "world citizens"

Manditory .gov issued ID to travel between geographic locations. Starting with cities, eventually required when just walking down the street.
 
What do you expect to happen subsequent to "come get our guns. . ."

Confiscation, most likely without appropriate compensation, will occur under threat of fines, imprisonment, or - failing prompt compliance or successful arrest - death. What could possibly be worth fining, jailing, or killing citizens over arms which have not harmed society?

Lots of pat or insightful answers can be given. Whatever it specifically is does not much matter. What matters is (eventually if things get too far) whatever it is they want, they will be willing to kill you on the spot if you don't comply. Armed citizens can choose to not comply, especially if they don't want to comply badly enough. There are things which you want to not do so badly that you'll kill to stop someone from making you do it; likewise, there's probably someone out there who wants you to do it so badly they'll kill you if you don't.

The discussion of the mindset causing someone to insist others "obey or die" may ultimately be up to psychologists and theologans. It has been manifest various ways throughout history; you all know the examples. Whether the power-hungry tyrant or the polypragmatician (ruling busybody), they eventually decide they know best and you must - MUST - obey.

Arms of any kind are the last advantage one has against forceful dominance. If "they" come to take my guns, I know that whatever they have planned is something so opposed to my principles and well-being that they are willing to kill me to force obedience, and likewise I am willing to kill to remain free from compulsion - and their knock is their message: "now is your last chance to submit; disarm and obey, or die." Why they do it is irrelevant; that they do it is everything.
 
Mastrogiacomo:

You know what I find laughable is how you use the ridiculous argument that "any vote that isn't for Bush is a vote for Kerry (or terrorists)". Give a me a break.... If I value my guns I'll vote Bush? Well hell, I value my 4th, 5th and 6th amendment rights too...should I also vote for Bush?

It never ceases to amaze me that hardcore republicans are just as bad a liberal gun-grabbers when it comes to politics. You will resort to any sort of name-calling or justification you can think of, especially scare tactics, into trying to convince people to vote for your man Bush. You sir have already done so by saying "if you value your guns you'll vote for Bush".

And for the icing on the cake: I witness this on many different boards...everyone arguing one way or the other who is the best candidate for President...Bush or Kerry...Bush vs. Kerry.

Does anyone here have ANY FREAKING CLUE as to where the real [Constitutional] power of our government lies? News flash: it's in Congress! Every 2 years we could bear witness to a brand new House! How about this: your man Bush does get re-elected but the House now has a super-majority of liberals. "Oh F-@&!", all the neo-cons will say. "We were so busy shooting down logical discussions of people who are voting for third parties and how we think they're wasting their vote and all this time representatives from around the nation got ejected for new liberals".

Here's another tidbit of info...do you honestly believe that this close to the election that there are so many people here at this message board that have NOT made up their minds of who they are voting for President? Do you actually believe your arguments of "vote to keep your guns, vote for Bush" really convince intelligent people here? "This isn't any time to waste your vote on principles by voting for a third party, we gotta keep Bush in the White House", the neo-cons continue to argue.

Get off your lazy keyboard commando butts and realize that there is more at stake here than just the presidency, and no matter what ridiculous arguments you think you can come up with when resorting to liberal gun-grabber tactics in political discussions, I will from now on, in every general election that comes available, be voting for as many libertarians that appear on my ballot.
 
I will from now on, in every general election that comes available, be voting for as many libertarians that appear on my ballot.
Click to expand...

I did not have to read far to know that statement was coming. Interesting that it was the last sentence in your post.
 
Well ProGlock -- consider this: I find it laughable that you'd consider Kerry the better candidate even though he voted against every weapon this country has and wants to use spit balls and the UN to fight terrorism. I'm sure he'll want us as a member.....

I also find it laughable that you don't feel Kerry will appoint judges that will eliminate your right to own. He already wants to tax guns and ammo.

And finally, I find it laughable that a man that said, no the war wasn't justified, yes, I'd have invaded Iraq -- just can't make up his damn mind what his position would be. Bottom line: he has no stones, his wife is no lady, and both are clueless about what the Commonwealth needed, forget about the U.S. By the way, is Kerry STILL getting two paychecks for work he's not doing....:rolleyes:

Vote for Kerry, give terrorists a free passport into the country because our whole defense will be watered down and people unarmed. Oh no, 9/11 won't ever happen again under Kerry -- our strong French, let's do nothing president. Of course you could not vote and let the liberals do it for you -- or vote for a Libertarian -- who was the LAST Libertarian president -- anyone remember? They win all the time, right?:scrutiny:
 
For those believing Kerry will be less detrimental to the Bill of Rights than Bush, please recall also that Kerry's campaign threatened retaliation against Sinclair Broadcasting for daring to air an anti-Kerry film. So much for the 1st Amendment. And this was said while campaigning. What will he say and do when he's achieved the office? Clinton used the IRS to silence his antagonists. What will Kerry do with the Patriot Act, which you should all recall he helped make law, and doesn't want to repeal but only to see it "tempered" (i.e. administered under his benevolent guidance).

At the risk of sounding defeatist (which isn't normally palatable to me), what is my voice versus the spoils of office they've garnered through Bush? If I had connections in the upper echelons of government or industry or had millions of bucks at my disposal, it would be one thing. But that's not the case.
Click to expand...

There's an old saying that all politics is local politics. And that's true. Reduced to its most basic level, representatives and senators need to please their constituency. And the constituency that gets pleased the most are the ones who offer the politicos gains and the ones who make their lives hell. It's the carrot and stick approach. I may not be able to contribute financially, but I can work for you and help bring voters to your side. Alternatively, I can bug the crap out of your office via letters and phone calls, distribute information to my friends and family and get them to call you, do the same with the local media, etc. The liberals didn't take the national Democratic party in a night: they elected people who fit their ideals at local/regional levels, then to higher office. Finally, they had people who believed as they did in the highest offices. They did the same with state legislatures and governorships, and thus had a large power base to operate from and promote their candidates.
 
if you thought slick willy was bad..kerry is worse..much worse.he tells everyone that he is for freedom to do this and freedom to do that yet he makes it a point to be VERY clear in his stance on gun control...an spreads the bull pretty thick on everything else.

would you like a permanent ban on the finesschwine and chuckie definition of what an assault weapon is?How bout a new ban on "sniper" rifles?gunshows bye bye..ffl dealers taxed and litigated out of existance?think Im being a bit...harsh?

as far as what would happen..prolly nothing.nothing at all.clinton did it and got caught,national tv covered the trials(seen everywhere) yet he stayed put cause "he was doing such a good job otherwise"..where does kerry truly stand on these issues of morals?if he gets in..there'll be alot of couch potatoes wishing they had voted..and alot of hindsight.
 
The 2A is the most important amendment in the BoR. It is the reset switch for the system. Without it, all other rights will fall victim to tyranny.

While the Patriot Act, anti-hate-speech legislation, and the War on Drugs continue to infringe upon our other rights, they are largely temporary. The Supreme Court can overturn or otherwise interpret against them. An act of congress can remove them. Or they can sunset on their own. But, if all else fails, the citizens of the US retain the right to throw the most final, desparate and terrible switch of all, effectively rebooting the system. Should that happen, a great number of elected officials may end up in trouble, ala the french revolution(s), only the US prefers rope.

Elimination of the 2A means there is no reset switch, and the ruling class (career politicians and party members) are free to run amok. Only those endorsed by either of the two major parties will have any rights, any power and eventually they will merge into oe Republicrat party... While I tend to think that the Republicans are better than the Democrats, they will be corrupted by unchecked power and authority.

Essentially, the end of the 2A is the goal of people who fail to realize they serve the public good at the publics request. They are generally aware that their 'solutions' only appease some of their constituents but don't want to take the time or make the effort to do something that is good for all of their constituents. They see the 2A as a threat to their own safety as it promises that should they go to far and disrupt the lives of too many people, they may find themselves on the receiving end of the devices they seek to ban or, in the event of a successful public uprising, swinging from the end of a rope. What they seek in trying to end the 2A is immunity from their own poor policy decisions.
 
The 2A is the most important amendment in the BoR. It is the reset switch for the system. Without it, all other rights will fall victim to tyranny.
Click to expand...

So, the Molon Labe crowd just sits around while other freedoms are taken from us, and its OK, as long as its not guns, and even then its ok as long as they dont actually confiscate anything. They can ban everything under the sun, but if what you own is grandfathered in, you will do nothing. Look at gun owners in DC, NY, California, Chicago, etc.... see that big "uprising"? I didn't think so. Its time to start caring about all your rights not just your "reset switch" that no one has the balls to use. If you let them take all of your rights except your "guns", because you think your guns will protect you at that point, you are sadly mistaken.

That 2nd amendment is sure doing a whole lot of "protecting" these days, isn't it?
 
That said, I think it is still important to watch for any rights being treated as regulated, potentially withdrawn privileges, under constant attack by "compelling government interests". All of that activity establishes the mindset that legislators are effectively able to ignore the Constitution on most any point and gives liberals the freedom to define a government du jour.

I have received a notice from GOA that they are against some Homeland Security Act provisions in principle, with potential impact on gun owners. I agree completely and intend to do my part in letting it be known how I feel about it in the best way I know how at this point. I have already written the White House and intend to write my legislators as well.

The latest is that the bill is not expected to be out of conference and ready for passage before the election. All things considered, I think that's a good thing, mainly because McCain's national ID card thing was not properly considered or debated and may not be dropped in committee. If the Senate's provision for civil rights oversight is dropped, then the whole bill and Congress in general is evil, as far as I am concerned. Might as well include the White House, especially if giving signature.

One of the reasons the bill may be "stalled", is that there is now a realization that it is potentially an election deal breaker. The more we make that apparent, the more civil rights concerns will be taken seriously in the future. The problem is always who to vote for instead. Rather than propose any change in direction, I am simply acknowledging that it could very well make a difference to a significant number of voters primed to vote for Bush. Personally, I am not going to enable Kerry in any way, under any circumstances, but I might acknowledge in the end voting for the "lesser of two evils" and then fighting the issues full bore after the election. My Congressional reps will really make the difference, determining what likely gets a rubber stamp in the White House.
 
Read all four pages...interesting stuff.

I don't know what I'll do. I'm far more afraid of this:

Children removed from the family home for their own good, so that they can be properly raised and educated to be good "world citizens"
Click to expand...

I can imagine for most people that had better happen AFTER they come get our guns.



As for the original question.

Three possibilities

1. Turn them in (50%)
2. Ignore the rule (49.99%)
3. Open Rebellion-Think Unintended Consequences type stuff (.01%)

Assuming 100 million gun owners, that's 10k rebels. That sounds about right to me....

In any case, it will be incremental, except maybe in Illinois :what:
 
I can imagine for most people that had better happen AFTER they come get our guns.

Which leads me to a better summary of my prior rant:

If "they come for our guns", it's because they're afraid we'll use those guns to stop whatever it is they have planned for us next - which is a very good reason to not hand them over meekly.
 
We have the elements in gun ownership and resolve, but it's the banding together in militias that makes real resistance possible. Militias are as hard to hold together as a road band, but some effort ahead of time, especially establishing leadership and contingency plans, would be part of any serious resolve to fight back.

Militias are legal but have been discredited as a concept, marginalized, or harrassed. I think if one does not take them seriously, then real resistance is not taken seriously either. The rest is all talk and will end with ah, sh$$t! Now whadda we do? Who's in charge here? Let's get organized. What's the signal? Where do we meet up? What should I bring?

A simple list of what-ifs and some solid, credible answers would be all it would take, should gun control really cross a critical line. I guess, first one has to know where that line is. Those who at least have a suitable weapon and a serious stash of ammo are on the right track but will not accomplish much alone.
 
I ask a simple question: What do you expect to happen subsequent to "come get our guns. . ."
Click to expand...
As in the far East, I would expect a large number of people to sign up for "empty hand" self defense courses.
I would expect crime to rise to new heretofor unbelievable levels.
I would expect taxes to be raised to new heretofor unbelievable levels as funds will be needed for more LEO to fight said crime.
I would expect a large majority of people to go on the dole with the resultant slimming down of business small and large unless gov't owned or subsidized.

Something like Atlas Shrugging.

Who (and) Where is John Galt?
 
To answer the original question.. to me it's a psychological point more than anything else. There is a difference between the armed citizen and the unarmed subject. Sure it sounds trite on a bumper sticker, and if you haven't actually lived in both head-spaces, it's hard to truly appreciate the difference. But it's very real, and critical to the tradition of liberty not just in this country, but at all.

What I fear should weapons be outlawed is not the death of my body, but rather the death of the American soul. A tradition of liberty and independence which only seems to pop up once every few millenea.. that is something I don't want to see lost. Not again.

Yes, there are hard choices there -- I don't like the Patiot Act or continued chipping away at the 4th any more than the most die-hard lefty ACLU member. But right here, right now, to me its a matter of fighting our most immediate battles and preserving our options for down the road.
 
I ask a simple question: What do you expect to happen subsequent to "come get our guns. . ."
Click to expand...
there is no simple answer,cant read and know exactly the future but we can change it by getting involved and voting...instead of watching it happen on the news after it has been done.its more difficult to change something after it has been done than to prevent it in the beginning.

there are already restrictions in place and it hasnt detrerred crime,in fact it has created it.take a look at those that live in states that have a special test now to own the guns of certain types.you registered them like you were told to do..the gun failed the test then what...gone or stored away in a free state- the street gangs and thugs still go about their daily buisness with less chances of worrying if the next "victim" will be able to do anything about it.unsuitable for "sporting "purposes?whose sporting purposes?

I have to wonder why anyone would want your or my guns, if taking them from honest citizens would have no deterrant effect on crime.this is why I have no trust for people who say I dont need them or cant have them...this is why Im voting and trying to encourage others to do so to stop it before it gets any worse.


take it for what its worth..whether it answers it or not,its my 2 cents.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top