Gun buy back

Beto O'Rourke “Americans who own AR-15s and AK-47s will have to sell them to the government.”
Just read an interesting article on conservatives threatening a blood bath if a mandatory buy back was enacted because of an obvious public safety hazard. reasons. https://newrepublic.com/article/154931/conservatives-well-spill-blood-keep-guns
And I thought I know where there are a lot of gun nuts. I wonder how much resistance would they actually put up or is it all talk if it were mandatory?

 

First, such a program is not a benign buyback, but a sugar coated (the thinking of GCAs) mandatory confiscation program.
You have some evidence in the NE where recent laws requiring registration of such guns against felony sanctions for non-compliance has met with around 10% success. I would expect the same if done nationally, along with a rise of a black market, most of it peaceful. But, start kicking in doors to enforce and have that result in loss of life... then, it’s a different ball game from an already polarized public and one already highly distrustful of the Government and mainstream media. Doesn’t seem like a great idea to experiment to me...it’s sort of not unlike playing Russian Roulette with only three unloaded chambers.
BTW, in application of eminent domain, fair market value is supposed to be the standard for just compensation. It isn’t likely any such program would result in ‘just’ compensation of the value of the guns in my collection.

 

I am not a violent person by any stretch of the imagination, but I would understand a armed resistance.

Hand guns kill ten times more often than a rifle and we are not talking about buy backs with hand guns.

The Virginia tech shooter should have taught the anti gun nuts some thing on the issue, but they refuse to listen and learn.

 

Officer, even my stripped lowers were lost in the unfortunate boating accident.

 

If an individual is left with absolutely no choice, but to either surrender their legally purchase, legally owned property, in punishment for crimes that they have not committed, or risk prosecution and the possibility of being killed by agents of their own government for failing to comply with the order, what exactly do the affected individuals have to lose by choosing to resist such an order with equal violence, and thus forcing the government to rethink its plans?

 

Wel, first, the term buy-back is a directly misleading term--on the verge of being a lie. I bought no guns from the government, so for the government to buy them, it would not be a buy-back. Second, do you think the government should start going door to door confiscating guns without probable cause?

 

Funny, the those on the Left expect their wet dream to be implemented by someone else with a gun risking lives and violating a number of other Constitutionally protected individual rights to suppress the 2a. Lots logic in that.

 

But the Heller misinterpretation stands in the way of a handgun buyback.

 

The authors of the March for Our Lives Peace Plan want the government to buy back about 100 million guns. Could it be done? Even if it only partially succeeded it would be worth it. Preventing a few thousand gun deaths and injuries every year would be a significant improvement. A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.

 

How much is a life worth?

 

Between 7 and 9 million dollars.

https://www.theglobalist.com/the-cost-of-a-human-life-statistically-speaking/

 

The government never owned our firearms, so buying them back won't be possible.

 

Yes, the terrorists and gang members will be first in line.

Those who had previous plans on a mass shooting will also surely be tempted.

 

So if we banned cell phones, we could save 23-30 billion dollars in human lives.

 

Hmmm... so what is the estimate for the unjust compensation paid to the victims of the institutional theft of legally owned private property.

 

"This is my rifle. This is my gun. This is for fighting. This is for fun".

 

That's not the point. Who do you think the bad guys are getting their guns from?

 

"that's not the point he says"

So in this expert plan you have, criminals still have their guns and only the law abiding would lose their guns.

Criminals get guns from criminality. Breaking into people's houses, stealing them from police lockers, smuggling them in, or whatever else they have to do to get them.

 

No, the constitution does.

 

True that! " SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED " . So easy to understand even a caveman can do it.

 

A lot of equivocation, yes buts and deflections, but not you. By ''individual'' you mean you, violence would ensue, and intention clear.

 

The Left’s stated wet dream is to disarm Americans. But any call for confiscation would not only be difficult to achieve in Congress and in the majority of the states given the current state of their laws and would not likely to pass SCOTUS scrutiny. However, by packaging the idea of a buyback program, the kind of program that has been tried and failed to achieve any of the hopes of GCAs have had, they figure they can get Americans to voluntarily give up their guns. It’s an Arnhem campaign. Criminals and the vast majority of gun owners won’t sell their guns.
Once, as Mr Beto has advocated, the incorrectly labeled ‘buyback’ program becomes required by executive action or law (not likely) it becomes a de facto confiscation program... that will not likely get SCOTUS approval if not preceded by a repeal or amendment of the 2a itself. And, never, in the history of the Country, even at the height of appetite for increased gun control, has there been enough votes in Congress or near enough states for ratification, to pull that off. Given 2016, and the increasing distrust of government (thanks in large part to the DEMS with the Russia Hoax, over calls for socialism and the new Green Deal... they are shooting (pun intended)/in the foot) and of mainstream media such a feat is even more unlikely. They will be as successful as Montgomery at Arnhem.

 

What will serve to physically prevent that minor number of firearms from quickly being replaced with new firearms?

 

According to the federal government, the value of a human life is worth less than the tax it collects on the retail sale of tobacco-related products.

 

Except for the fact that such is not what has been stated on the part of myself.