The usual firearms debates seem to be going on forever. Is anything really being accomplished? I have not seen any evidence that a single person has changed their view, regardless of which side of the issue they support.
How about a new scenario for debate or discussion.
Assume that a law is passed that makes private ownership of firearms illegal.
1. How is a law such as this going to be enforced?
2. Will people who currently have legally purchased firearms turn all of them in?
Originally posted by mwmiller
The usual firearms debates seem to be going on forever. Is anything really being accomplished? I have not seen any evidence that a single person has changed their view, regardless of which side of the issue they support.
How about a new scenario for debate or discussion.
Assume that a law is passed that makes private ownership of firearms illegal.
...[text shortened]... be enforced?
2. Will people who currently have legally purchased firearms turn all of them in?
Originally posted by mwmiller1)First an open police station handing in policy, anomous, of cause.
1. How is a law such as this going to be enforced?
2. Will people who currently have legally purchased firearms turn all of them in?
Then a tough law passed for those that kept them.
Then a search and detain policy for those suspected of owning.
2)They'll face arrest if they don't going on the first answer.
But seriously I don't think it will ever happen. from a paper printed last year; Despite a ban on handguns introduced in 1997 after 16 children and their teacher were shot dead in the Dunblane massacre the previous year, their use in crimes has almost doubled to reach 4,671 in 2005-06. Official figures show that although Britain has some of the toughest anti-gun laws in the world, firearm use in crime has risen steadily
Originally posted by mwmillerFirst off, that law would be in violation of the U.S. Constitution, not that it matters anyway. The government has be in violation of the Constitution for many years now. However, that law would be going too far for most of the U.S. citizens and there would most likely be an armed revolt due to it.
The usual firearms debates seem to be going on forever. Is anything really being accomplished? I have not seen any evidence that a single person has changed their view, regardless of which side of the issue they support.
How about a new scenario for debate or discussion.
Assume that a law is passed that makes private ownership of firearms illegal.
...[text shortened]... be enforced?
2. Will people who currently have legally purchased firearms turn all of them in?
(1)For a law like this to be enforced, the citizens would have to give them up or the government would have to come in and take them like they did after Katrina, even then you would have some who would fight back and be killed along with those who are trying to take them. It would be another Civil War for the United States.
(2)NO, some would but there would be many who wouldn't, like myself.
When the assalt weapons ban came into effect, those who already had the firearms did not have to give them up, we just weren't able to buy them any more, unless they were the ones that were approved to be sold.
Originally posted by mwmillerIt will never happen in the United States because the legislators, media and anti-gun heathens know that many of them would be killed if a door-to-door seizure where ever attempted.
The usual firearms debates seem to be going on forever. Is anything really being accomplished? I have not seen any evidence that a single person has changed their view, regardless of which side of the issue they support.
How about a new scenario for debate or discussion.
Assume that a law is passed that makes private ownership of firearms illegal.
...[text shortened]... be enforced?
2. Will people who currently have legally purchased firearms turn all of them in?
Originally posted by mwmillerQuestion number two. Speaking for myself. No.
The usual firearms debates seem to be going on forever. Is anything really being accomplished? I have not seen any evidence that a single person has changed their view, regardless of which side of the issue they support.
How about a new scenario for debate or discussion.
Assume that a law is passed that makes private ownership of firearms illegal.
...[text shortened]... be enforced?
2. Will people who currently have legally purchased firearms turn all of them in?
Originally posted by mwmiller
The usual firearms debates seem to be going on forever. Is anything really being accomplished? I have not seen any evidence that a single person has changed their view, regardless of which side of the issue they support.
How about a new scenario for debate or discussion.
Assume that a law is passed that makes private ownership of firearms illegal.
1. How is a law such as this going to be enforced?
Well, assuming that the law was created without first amending the US Constitution, such a law would be unlawful in the first place. Knowing this, American gun owners are not likely to voluntarily comply with it en masse any more than they are likely to comply with a law that deprived them of their right to free speech.
This is the framework in which I believe American gun owners view the right to bear arms. It is not that the government has granted The People permission to keep guns for the convenience of hunting or defending themselves against criminals etc. Rather, the Constitution is merely acknowledging a fundamental, pre-existing right of all peaceful people everywhere to protect themselves from any tyranny (government sponsored or otherwise), and to keep and bear the means of doing so. It is the right that, when push comes to shove, protects all the other inalienable rights that are acknowledged and codified in (not granted by) our Constitution.
So that is what the hypothetical law would be up against. How you go about successfully enforcing an illegal law against armed people who know and value their rights, and who are also already loosely organized in groups like the NRA, GOA, and private gun clubs etc, and who would likely view resisting such a law as a patriotic last-ditch stand against the exact type of tyranny the 2nd Amendment was designed to prevent, is beyond me. But I'm absolutely sure it would not be worth it.
2. Will people who currently have legally purchased firearms turn all of them in?
Speaking for myself, barring an amendment of the US Constitution, no way in hell.
"Gun Rights" are a euphemism for "Independence of Thought" and “freedom of action”. With our “Rights” tucked under our arm, we feel confident that we are the match of any government. Government is always seen as the enemy, because government IS always the enemy in the terms of “individual vs. state”.
There is a direct correlation between Socialization and Independence that pivots on a fine line somewhere mid-point between Community and Self.
The tighter people are packed into houses on blocks in cities, the more socialization wins out over independence. I can go up to my ranch in Idaho, fire up the cat and dig myself a lake, fill it with water and plants and stock it with fish. A city dweller can move his trash bin from one four foot long section of the alley to another four foot section.
I can go into town with a sidearm holstered and nobody would even give me a second look. Try that in London or New York. The more socialized the population, the less freedom of action, including self interested actions of all types are allowed.
As to how the government will try to take away our independence in favor of socialized norms, I do not envy them. Firstly, they will more than likely be democrats. This means that they will have to have at least sixteen years of meetings (with group hugs) to build up courage. Then they will have to find at least a couple of their own willing to touch an evil “fire arm”. Then they shake so hard from fear of the noise it will make that they are terrible shots. Ever see sixteen democrats shaking like pups shiiteing razor blades, trying to yell out Miranda rights while running backwards away from an angry redneck? It ain’t pretty.