Gun buy back

Discussion in 'Gun Control' started by edna kawabata, Sep 5, 2019.

Tags:
?

I would..

  1. hand over my guns

  2. hide my guns

  3. go to jail

  4. armed resistance

Multiple votes are allowed.
Results are only viewable after voting.
  1. APACHERAT

    APACHERAT Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2013
    Messages:
    38,026
    Likes Received:
    16,042
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    20 million American citizens own an AR-15 style of rifle.
    Liberal Democrats argue that it's impossible to deport 21 million illegal aliens and undocumented Democrats.
    But the liberal Democrats are going to either buy back or confiscate 20 million AR-15's.
     
    Jarlaxle likes this.
  2. Well Bonded

    Well Bonded Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2018
    Messages:
    9,049
    Likes Received:
    4,354
    Trophy Points:
    113
    It's an excellent insight to the workings of the progressive liberal mindset.

    If it's something they support the government lacks and will not be provided the resources to shut it down, but if it is something they dislike, the government has the Cruse Missiles needed to bomb the home of anyone who doesn't comply.

    These are some really warped thinking people right there.
     
    Last edited: Sep 14, 2019
    An Taibhse and APACHERAT like this.
  3. BryanVa

    BryanVa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2015
    Messages:
    451
    Likes Received:
    354
    Trophy Points:
    63
    No. What we have is this....

    26 citizens. Each of whom owns private property purchased by themselves. Regardless of whether or not you believe they have a right to this property, even the anti-gunner who wants to take it from them agrees they have not committed any crime or done anything wrong by purchasing their property. In addition, everyone agrees that they have done nothing wrong with their property, and that they are peacefully possessing their property without threatening their neighbors.

    Anti-gun advocates convince the government to declare that the peaceful possession of this property must be declared illegal and punishable by fine and/or imprisonment. In an effort to make this look like something other than the confiscation demand that it is, they further convince the government to offer some tax money in exchange for the mandatory confiscation of this property.

    The result is exactly what the anti-gunner wants….

    2 people are tempted by the attempt to bribe them with their own money, and they are disarmed for a minimal payment (with their own money).

    24 see the “buyback” for what it is, and they refuse to comply. They are instantly declared criminals. Mind you, their only crime was the possession of lawfully acquired personal property—which was peacefully possessed without even the slightest imputation of offense or threat by them. Still that property is hated by the anti-gunner—and this somehow justifies hating the owner of the property enough to instantly turn him into a criminal. For each of these 24, the anti-gunner has successfully driven a wedge between them and the power of their government.

    9 of the 24 try to hide their criminality. The anti-gunner views this as a success, for these people who dared to own property they don’t like are instantly under suspicion for possibly continuing their wrong-thinking conduct. Perhaps someday they can even be caught and punished for refusing to bow to the demand to live their life according to the desires of the anti-gunner. Such an end would only be just in their mind.

    The other 15 openly resist. These cases are also viewed as a success. The anti-gunner does not care about the safety of law enforcement officers who have to enforce their demands. The goal is these 15 are quickly fingered and declared fugitives from all that is right and good. Assuming the government is able to come to grips with all of them successfully, they all end up either in jail or the ground. Such is the price for refusing the will of the anti-gunner’s choice for how you should live your life. And if any law enforcement officers are injured or killed taking guns from citizens who were—until suddenly declared criminals—peacefully possessing their property, then this becomes bonus propaganda material for the need to move on to the next gun control law.

    26 people—whose only crime was the peaceful possession of private property—are all forcibly re-educated to agree with the anti-gunner’s view of how you will be allowed to live your life. If the price of this education for some is more tax money, then we can always raise taxes. If the price for this education for some is the lives of law-enforcement officers ordered to take on those who resist, then that is an additional risk the anti-gunner is willing for these officers to take. If this education costs the lives and freedom of otherwise peaceful gun owners, then that is just the price they have to pay for disagreeing with the anti-gunner.

    If you are an anti-gunner, then what’s not to love about this?
     
    Last edited: Sep 16, 2019
    Jarlaxle and Well Bonded like this.
  4. An Taibhse

    An Taibhse Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2016
    Messages:
    7,238
    Likes Received:
    4,819
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I was raised in a Country that had laws and selective enforcement methods designed to silence and suppress political opposition. If you were considered loyal to the current power, you were basically privileged and considered exempt from sanctions. If not, you were subject to justified harassment and other methods of suppression. It was a means of forcing group conformity and compliance determined by an elite, exempt powered class.
    I came to the US to avoid the dual system of rights/privilege and justice, now finding such a dual system being promoted in the US... not for the shill justification of public safety, but as a means of targeting political opposition. Not long ago, in that vein, illustrating the point, the MS media got access to the records of those in NY city with gun permits and published their locations; what was the public safety justification of that...or was it done to covertly increase the potential for targeted harassment of those owning guns who frequently voted in political opposition to the party using gun control as a political tool?
     
  5. Well Bonded

    Well Bonded Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2018
    Messages:
    9,049
    Likes Received:
    4,354
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Years ago that happened here in Florida when the Florida Department of State handled the licensing, they denied the Sunshine (Florida's version of FOIA) request by the Miami Herald and the Herald sued, the DOS and State Attorney fought the suit and dragged it out long enough for the Florida Legislature to pass an amendment to 790 exempting CCL license information from the Sunshine law and the Legislature also moved licensing to the Department of Agriculture.

    Now that may seem like a strange move, but by doing so all of the existing records that might have been exposed under the Heralds suit where no longer with the agency they where suing, so even if they prevailed on appeal it would be a dead end and by existing law they could not force the DOA to release anything.

    In the end the anti-gun Miami Herald spent a lot of money and got skunked.

    Now lets flip that on it's head.

    Back in my younger years I bought a tow truck and offered repossession services to a number of local car lots.

    I was in the business for a while and wanted to go out on my own.

    Now I don't know if you understand anything about that business, but generally speaking people get upset, sometimes very upset when the repo-man comes a calling, nobody in South Florida where public transportation is total BS wants to lose their car, so one hears all kinds of excuses and many threats.

    Well, I applied for a Broward County concealed carry permit, I paid a $500 fee back when $75 a week was good money, went through a BSO background check, a BSO psych interview (an additional $150) and went before the County Commission to explain why I needed a CCP.

    A Commissioner named Howard Foreman, who became a State Senator, who fell out of favor, then became the Broward County Clerk of the Courts, failed again and lost the election to his ex-wife who is not facing criminal charges, denied my permit because I didn't produce a "compelling reason for the Commission to issue me one."

    I was kinda of miffed.

    But I had some school friends of mine who formed a local weekly rag that was digging into corruption by the Democrats running Broward.

    So I approached them and offered to pay for all of the costs of suing Broward County to force them to provide to us a list of everyone in Broward who had been issued a CCP.

    It blew up in our faces, a lot of well connected people with CCP's in Broward did not what their names made public and we got a lot of pushback, but a local attorney joined in Pro Bono and we won the first round, but the result was useless we thought, but not .

    We where provided the entire list, but every name on it was redacted, someone used a black marker to block out each name, my friends where pissed, the attorney helping us was ready to go back to court and sue again.

    It was about 7:00 PM.

    I was sitting there thinking this is really effed up and then I noticed the list was typed, on the front the redactions of the names where not visible, but on the back I could see them typed in reverse.

    So we where able to begin to collect the names, but being a hippy anti local government paper no one would take us seriously without images of the list, which no matter how I moved the lighting on the light table around I could not photograph.

    One person tried to use a pencil to highlight the impressions in the paper, but it caused more damage that is revealed, another member of the papers staff got this bright idea to sharpen all the pencils we could find and use the graphite to bring up the type, that sort of worked and gave me a great idea.

    I called the FLPD and asked if a few officers I rode with where on duty and if they where to please have them call me back.

    Twenty minutes or so later a officer I had rode with many times called and wanted to know what was up, I begged him to stop by the papers office and loan us his fingerprint kit.

    He showed up within minutes.

    The fingerprint graphite worked well, the officer looked at some of the reversed names and commented, some of these guys are convicted criminals, keep the kit I'll see you next week, on leaving he commented "be careful."

    I was able to photograph the documents and then in the darkroom reverse print it showing the names.

    We where cranked, our paper had to go to bed by Thursday morning for a Saturday distribution, to be printed over at the Fort Lauderdale News and it was 4 AM Thursday morning.

    A very lovely and talented young lady was cutting and pasting, not on a screen, but on a table what was being written and what I brought out of the darkroom and we carried our copy over to the FLN well in time for distribution on Saturday.

    The story broke, the FLN picked up on it and within a week we where slammed with 4 lawsuits for disclosing the privacy of those connected people who could buy a CCP from the County Commission in Broward.


    It put our little paper out of business.
     
  6. Doofenshmirtz

    Doofenshmirtz Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2016
    Messages:
    28,018
    Likes Received:
    19,305
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Good question. Lets look at our history fighting an enemy hiding among friendlies. How did we do in Vietnam and the Middle East?
     
  7. An Taibhse

    An Taibhse Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2016
    Messages:
    7,238
    Likes Received:
    4,819
    Trophy Points:
    113
    If, on a confiscation raid, armed resistance is encountered rather than accept responsibility, those advocating forced confiscation will cite the instance of armed resistance as a post justification of the danger they claim is posed by civilian ownership of such weapons. I suspect, they’d hope (since these advocates will rely on others to enforce confiscation rather than be first through the door) an instance of armed resistance occurs so they can offer the ‘See, We told you so pronouncement of victory’.
     
  8. Nightmare515

    Nightmare515 Ragin' Cajun Staff Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2011
    Messages:
    11,132
    Likes Received:
    4,899
    Trophy Points:
    113
    This is what I personally believe with obviously no way to quantify it seeing as though nobody can actually predict the future.

    For one I highly doubt and can almost 100% guarantee that even if Beto were magically elected there wouldn't be actual confiscation in the sense of Law Enforcement coming door to door to take guns. What they would more than likely do is ban the future sale of them, the ammunition for them, and basically say if you're caught with it from this day forward then that's your ass. It's the same with drugs. Cops don't go door to door looking for bags of cocaine they just wait to catch you with it in public somewhere or something.

    Folks would protest and we would likely see fairly decent scale demonstrations of folks with ARs and AKs slung on their shoulders in an act of defiance and protest. Not armed up in battle formations with their rifles pointed at the riot cops or anything but rather hundreds of thousands of people together protesting with rifles on their person basically saying what are you gonna do about it? Sort of like the Tea Party movement thing only with people bringing their guns with them as well.

    I believe many Law Enforcement agencies, especially the smaller Sheriffs departments around the country would stand alongside the protesters instead of across from them.

    The compliance rate would be abysmal. The Kiwis can't even get their citizens to give up their guns in respectable numbers, this is AMERICA, that ain't happening here.

    What it would turn in to, in my opinion, is the same thing that is going on in NY after the Safe Act was passed only on a national level. I highly doubt that anybody is legitimately that naive as to believe that NY isn't still full of AR-15s that nobody was bothered to register with the state.

    There will be "armed" protests (not shootouts with the ATF but as described earlier), very little compliance and a whole lot of defiance. I don't personally believe that there would be an all out bloody Civil War or anything.

    "Armed" protests Tea Party style would be the most effective solution and most likely outcome in my opinion. I mean lets disregard which particular side one is on and just think about it rationally. What exactly CAN Law Enforcement actually do against hundreds or even thousands of citizens with AR-15s slung on their shoulder protesting in public? That would be way too touchy of a scenario to start deploying water cannons and pepper spray and other traditional riot control methods.

    Protesting is one thing, we see it all the time on the news with cops arresting 10 people on this day for protesting or disturbing the peace, etc. But dealing with protesters standing there with rifles in their hands is a whole different ballgame. Thats a situation to where I think the cops would be ordered to just back down and go away. Not because they are scared or anything but rather the risk of setting off a chain reaction is way too great in a situation like that. If EITHER side got stupid then that has the potential to spiral way out of control very fast and that is NOT a news story that anybody wants to see.

    Doesn't matter who is right or wrong, it would be a political and social nightmare for everybody if there was ever a news headline stating: "Warzone, 15 Officers and 20 citizens killed in violent shootout as Officers clash with armed protesters over new gun law". If THAT happens then I could possibly foresee all hell breaking loose and that would send all levels of government into pure chaos.
     
    Well Bonded likes this.
  9. StarFox

    StarFox Banned

    Joined:
    May 1, 2018
    Messages:
    2,515
    Likes Received:
    2,876
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I would be a scared of turning them in, I mean I would be standing in line with hundreds of gang bangers, and bank robbers, and rapists, and murderers all and kidnappers all dutifully complying with the order, that would be dangerous. Won't someone think of the children!
     

Share This Page