Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Then why stop at simple firearms? If it really is that easy to search American homes without warrant nor just cause, we could also instruct the cops to weed out drug users, sexual deviants, political extremists and every other type of undesirable during these raids. Once we have them all in custody, we'll just need to build a big encampment in the desert to hold them in...
First you get the 2nd Amendment repealed and pass some sweeping new firearms laws. After that is done you make it a felony to be in possession of these guns. The law abiding citizens will turn them in, I would say the vast majority would give them right up. Then you offer big rewards for tips on illegal guns and you search homes with warrants and you put the arrests on national TV. After that another significant amount of people would give up their guns on an amnesty program.
I'm not saying that is what we should do, but that is what we could do.
Such a program, even if it is a liberal wet dream, would accomplish absolutely nothing.
It would be a purely symbolic action.
You would be left with people like James Holmes and Adam Lanza and what's his face from Tucson (oh yeah - Loughner) with the ability to access weapons on the black market, and law abiding citizens whom could potentially stop such massacres, being unable to do so, because they can't legally access firearms.
Liberal ideas have one common underlying quality - madness!
No you can't........ The 2nd wasn't give to us as a Right by the Govt. The Govt can only take what it give and or give what it can take, but the Govt can not take rights given to the people by the Creator.
The govt can try....... The govt can't bring the military to bear arms against us We the people either, and if it did We the People Vets from Vietnam era and forward would out number ALL military combined anyway.
The only really large force that could be called out would in fact be called out by various governors which have the National Guard under their control.
These NG guys are the direct family of the population of the states they would be called out in...
My son is one and a officer no less.
So who's side do you expect him to stand on once illegal orders have been issued? he owns an Ar-15 and a Ar-10 and the NG issued him a M-4...
So that leave the COPS......... They too swore an oath to up hold the cons, and protect the cons, not the people not the president not congress, but the CONS itself from ALL enemies foreign and domestic....
And lets say illegal action does take the 2nd...... Then you can bank on the 1st will fall and when that falls so will the Nation.....
Ya know with so many little weasely gun grabbers telling us all how this is gonna go down, it just makes me want a refund on my taxes. Because what ever the hell you learned in school appears to either be all wrong, or all you got was a passed ahead and for no more than finger painting.
Basically you are surrounded, and have lost the battle before it started...
And now you've wiped out the savings in grocery costs that plenty of poor folks with older rifles get by taking a deer, or some turkeys, or even a hog.
Liberal proposals always have negative unintended consequences - on top of the negative consequences that are directly attributable to all liberal policies.
Many of your SWaT team members and the most of your LEOs are private gun owners themselves. Which side of the debate do you think they'd come down on? Who do you think they'd have more sympathy with, the govt or their fellow citizen? Would officer Joe knock down Papaw's door and take those rifles that they have both used for hunting ducks each year? Would SWAT team member Nancy really feel comfortable going to her sister's home and removing the pistol their father gave her to protect herself because she works long hours and lives alone?
Even using the military for this action would be pointless, as most of them fall to the right of the political spectrum, and probably a significant portion of them are gun owners themselves.
This is a pipe-dream, people. It would be prohibitively expensive, downright dangerous, and completely useless, as there's so many damn ways I could hide what I own that is not registered and about which the govt knows nothing, that any search would be a grandiose waste of time.
Technically, the president can't write laws. That doesn't stop President Obama from sending drafts of bills to Congress , which are then adopted by members of Congress, circumventing the spirit of the Constitution which provides for bills to origninate in Congress.
The executive branch is charged with enforcement of the law - however - some law is simply unenforceable, which is the point I belive that poster was making.
The president can enforce the law - recall President Andrew Jackson's retort to Chief Justice Marshall's opinion in Worcester v. Georgia(1832). Marshall had affirmed Cherokee(and by extension - all Native American tribes) soveriegnty. President Jackson (a Democrat - by the way) refused to comply with the SCOTUS decision. He famously said, "John Marshall has made his decision; now let him enforce it!"
Speaking of writing and enforcing law - witness President Obama's nearly 1,000 executive orders that he has signed.
I'm sure his neighborhood of 300 lb weekend warriors would take on a swat team
What a ridiculous conversation.
Strawman.
You libs make pathetic arguments.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.