The future of guns & our RKBA in the next 50 years

[WALKERs210]

I would love to think that in 50 yrs things might be back like when I was 12. We could walk thru the middle of town with our 22's and shotguns and never had a single person look our way. Now if a boy in 5th grade points his finger he get expelled from school. With a socialistic president in office and all his cronies who knows what will befall our nation.

 

[AlexanderA]

First of all, 50 years is too long a time frame to make meaningful predictions.

That said, I think there will be variable results, based on geography and subject matter. Regarding geography, we're already seeing a trend in which the population is sorting itself out based on ideology (part of which is attitudes toward guns). The end point could be that the heartland becomes less restrictive as to guns while the coastal urban centers become much more restrictive. Because of the way the federal system is structured, we won't see draconian national legislation -- or if we do, some states will start seriously thinking about seceding.

Regarding subject matter, I can see a less restrictive trend on handguns for self-defense (easier or no licensing for concealed carry, etc.), but a more restrictive trend for so-called assault weapons and large-capacity magazines.

The thing to remember, though, is that the future is not set in stone. The outcome depends a lot on our own actions.

 

[buck460XVR]

50 years is one generation. As Justin said, sentiment towards gun ownership is as positive now as it has been for decades. While there has been small increases in regulations by states/municipalities, Gun ownership itself and particiaption is shooting sports has increased. This one generation is us and our kids. If we have done our job, they will continue what we have passed on to them. I doubt if there will be much in more restrictive gun legislation unless there is a catistropic change in the lifestyle of Americans.

 

[SunnySlopes]

This is just what our enemies and competitors would like to happen. The creation of several weaker adversaries from one strong one.

Exactly. But it will never happen. If such a thing were to happen, DC would have fewer economic resources with which to perpetuate their corruption (of all parties), vacations, benefits, et al. And they'll never allow that to happen.

Sort of like when I hear people talking about California splitting into two or three separate states. Do people honestly think the thieves in Sacramento will allow their tax base to be cut in half, or worse? Never.

Re the purpose of the thread. In the next 50 years, I see firearm friendly states becoming more firearm friendly. But I also see the anti-Constitution states increasingly being slapped down by lawsuits in the SCOTUS.

I would sure like to see Reagan's anti machine gun bill of 1986 repealed, but I doubt that will happen in my lifetime.

 

[lobo9er]

it has been decided long ago the future of firearms in the U.S. by the U.N. Do a little research maybe you will agree with me maybe you won't. But the information is there and its from our gov't and U.N. some documents go back 20+ years. Describing how all manufacturers will be owned by one group, limiting slowly what the populace can have and all manufacturers will produce military weapons. Sounds pretty close to whats happening. Will it all come together, no one knows. But the is information is there for all to see from is from gov't documents so it makes for interesting reading anyhow.

 

[dagger dog]

I voted increasing regulations, they want "MORE OF MY CAKE"

 

[theotherwaldo]

50 years is 2 1/2 generations. Traditionally, that would mean 2 1/2 full revisions of the country's philosophies. With technology intensifying the information cycles and with the increasing politicization of information and communications (The PATRIOT Act, the NSA, and the New York Times, for examples), the future of any one facet of our society's traditions was never more unpredictable than it is right now.

All that we can do is to continue to help those generations to value what we think is ethical and valuable.

 

[lobo9er]

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE

DEPARTMENT OF STATE PUBLICATION 7277
Disarmament Series 5
Released September 1961

Office of Public Services
BUREAU OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS

interesting read if anyone has a few minutes - Directly relates with OP post and this topic in general.

 

[itsa pain]

50 years is one generation. As Justin said, sentiment towards gun ownership is as positive now as it has been for decades. While there has been small increases in regulations by states/municipalities, Gun ownership itself and particiaption is shooting sports has increased. This one generation is us and our kids. If we have done our job, they will continue what we have passed on to them. I doubt if there will be much in more restrictive gun legislation unless there is a catistropic change in the lifestyle of Americans.

The guy in the post above you says he remembers walking up main st. with a gun and there was no problem. I heard guys saying they would take guns on the school bus leave them in school lockers and walk home after school with them hunting along the way. You could buy a gun thru the mail. How can anyone figure it is better today? I imagine how bad it will be in another 50 years

 

[wally]

I voted complete ban, but it should be Complete Ban or Second American Revolution leading to total Freedom.

 

[Welding Rod]

The only thing for sure is we will be as free as we deserve to be.

 

[TanklessPro]

Not sure where it will end, but it will be a fight the whole time.

People that think it won't are fooling themselves.

 

[coonan1911]

Hey All,

We have been through this about 5 years ago in Australia when the then liberal government decided that because a guy in Tasmania decided to go on a shooting spree
that all law abiding licence shooters would be deem dangerous and that all firearms full semi auto and all hand guns over .357mag would become illegal and semi auto pistols will have a barrel no longer than 122mm and magazines no more than 10 rounds.
This was called the BUY BACK. They were able to check the registry to know who had what and any person who didn't bring in the required illegal firearms were penalised with arrest and found guilty until proven innocence.
The years have gone but they have been nibbling away slowly with various legislation which is pushed by the gun control lobbyists .
All I can say good luck as if they get one thing in they will not stop just like our leaders hell bent to destroy our sport and hunting in this country. And if its like anything which happen in WW 2 where the government confiscated all firearms to protect the civilians
in case of a invasion so we couldn't protect our self.
This what the thinking was and still is in this country
Count your lucky stars that you have the NRA working for all shooters.
Best Of Luck
coonan1911

 

[Ignition Override]

One problem appears to be likely: after a few more well-publicized tragic events, a much larger number of states could easily manage to pass tighter regulations. These precedents will give the urban populations a feeling of greater security, allowing later passage of further restrictions.

The second problem will be an indirect, sometimes unrelated result: the upward spiral in the cost of ammunition well ahead of inflation, with little chance that a shrinking supply of surplus ammo (if not destroyed by UN/Brit-Euro "arms control groups") could become as cheap per dollar values, as it was reported to have been years ago.

To sum it up, we can relax, and trust Senators such as Schumer, Feinstein, Boxer, Franken, former mayors such as Bloomberg to allow us "reasonable gun control", can't we? Who needs the NRA? Look at how many hunters care nothing about guns that they say (assume) "Aren't used for hunting".

coonan1911: So many think it can't ever happen here, but the enemies of freedom only need one bite at a time, and we are already being conditioned to this.
My fellow Americans are often complacent about the long-term, when we are victorious resisting or limiting today's threats.

 

[JRH6856]

What is likely to happen is that we will continue to support "advances" such as CCW laws requiring shall issue permits in all 50 states. And most of us will probably come to agree that such permits should only be issued to those who can demonstrate adequate knowledge and proficiency to handle a firearm safely. Eventually, those laws will be used to restrict the right to carry to the point nullifying it. This will be done by making the demonstration so rigorous and the training requirement so onerous and expensive, that only a very few will be able to afford to meet the requirements for a CCW permit. The constitutional justification for this will be that the Constitution calls for a "well-regulated' militia. Those who can't qualify to carry a firearm are obviously not qualified to own one under the Constitutional requirement to be well-regulated. It won't happen overnight, but it will happen because every advance which allows a right to be defined and regulated by law for the good of society is a step backwards for the freedom of the individual to exercise that right.

 

[Calibre44]

Speaking from experience, I believe it will largely depend on whether or not you have another school shooting. Massacres are bad enough but when they involve minors the emotional upheaval and ground-swell of public opinion is so immense politicians feel duty bound to try and prevent another one - and that means gun control.

 

[0to60]

The state of gun rights will always be a function of the overall sentiment toward guns. Right now, we're in the midst of a nationwide surge of interest in guns that seems to have started in the late 90's. As a result, more people are buying these things, ammo is harder to find, and ALL 50 states have CCW laws.

If that sentiment were to change, i.e. if people generally lost interest in guns, then the laws would probably tighten up a bit. Thus, speculating over the state of RKBA is really speculating over what consumer interest is going to look like.

No one has really been able to do that with any accuracy.

 

[MagnumDweeb]

Here is something you need to consider. What about the shrinking middle class in this country. It's gun owners who typically care about gun rights, and it takes money to fully appreciate your gun rights. Now there's barely any decent paying jobs it seems unless you have a M.D. or J.D. after your last name.

I hate to be that guy, but 1% of this country is creating a barbell in the distribution of wealth in this country. Are we coming back, sure a little, but not much and we need a stronger middle class because a stronger middle class will mean more gun buyers and more gun buyers will mean more pro-gun voters. That's just something we have to understand.

If folks can't afford food, they're not likely going to buy a gun, and my charity ends with me sharing my food that is grown in 20'x60' garden plot. So we need to strengthen the middle class, and we need to get them into guns. Without them we are looking at losing battle because the other side of things is socialism and those folks have a habit of hating gun ownership and the right to self-defense.

 

[Ignition Override]

Calibre44 put it in a perfect nutshell.
I'm reluctant to even use the words "school shooting", but heaven forbid if we had one or two more....either some federal laws, or many of our state laws could become more like those of the UK or "Oz" (Australia), even with no mass confiscations.

The primary reason I'm getting my first CCW out of the way this winter is simply to Have It, before the next minor or major panic and consequent politicians' loose lips make it impossible to attend a quick class. The CCW should make it even quicker/easier to buy the next gun, often a FTF personal deal.

 

[gbran]

Count me as pessimistic.