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.
I don't have a problem with abolishing the Second Amendment and the confiscation of certain classifications of weapons if, on balance, it will save thousands of lives annually. I think the problem here lies simply in the total amount of guns in circulation. Australia only had to confiscate 600k+ firearms that were deemed illegal under its new laws.
So, let's say in this hypothetical scenario that the 2nd Amendment is abolished. Ok great, now what? We enact a (insert weapon) ban and institute a mandatory gun buyback program....Okay....Well, the U.S. has over 300 million total guns in circulation (by some estimates). Let's say 20% of those are made illegal under a new law, well that still leaves 60 million guns that would have to be confiscated.
That seems almost insurmountable to me, I don't know how you accomplish that. I'm less worried about how gun-owners will react in such a scenario, it's not going to start a civil war like some believe and any armed standoffs will be a very small group of people, not to mention short-lived.
It won't save lives, it would likely cost even MORE lives. Even the rabidly anti gun Violence Police Center says over 90,000 lives per year are saved by defensive gun uses. Even including suicides that's 3x as many saved as lost by someone with a gun per year. The CDC study showed millions of defensive gun uses every year.
Criminals aren't going to turn their guns in, even with the buy backs today the only guns they get are broken junk that aren't worth anything and don't work anyway. Take firearms away from tens of millions of law abiding citizens and you're only going to create more victims, not save lives.
A larger problem you have with abolishing the 2nd amendment is most states also have similar amendments in their state constitutions and many states have started passing laws to ignore federal gun control laws that violate the 2nd amendment. Good luck enforcing a federal ban when the states refuse to enforce or help the feds - sounds rather like the illegal alien situation, doesn't it?
I believe it was far right commentator who said that the 1994 'assault weapon ban,' was somewhat toothless, but it was a necessary preparatory step for a real ban on assault style weapons.
We're going to get there eventually, as most of the world's advanced nations have, but we're not ready yet.
What is needed right now are common sense restrictions at the state level, as we just did here in WA by passing Initiative 1639. Eventually, yes, we will come to get your assault style weapons. But not just yet. A comment like that of Mr. Swalwell is simply one more small preparatory step.
Criminals aren't going to turn their guns in, even with the buy backs today the only guns they get are broken junk that aren't worth anything and don't work anyway
Actually, there have been several gun buybacks around the country where shoulder-fired rocket launchers were turned in. We had one of them right here in Seattle. Seattle Gun Buyback Nets a Missile Launcher | TIME.com
Here's another from LA. The LA buyback also netted 75 assault-style, military grade weapons.
You think so? It comes down to how the ignorant liberals define "assault weapons". The nuts in Washington just passed an initiative that defines ALL semi auto rifles as "assault weapons". You don't honestly think that banning them all isn't the ultimate goal of the left, do you?
I think there's a whole lot of hysteria on both sides of the subject.
I'm old enough to have received mail order catalogs in the 60s peddling all manner of military surplus weapons. When that channel of purchasing was closed in 1968, it didn't hamper gun aficionados from purchasing whatever they desired. They just had to do it in person.
I'm old enough to recall more than five decades of hand wringing and jibber-jabbering over "they're coming to take my guns!" and in all those years it's been a cry of "the sky is falling!"
Yes, I personally own what would probably be considered an "assault rifle" by many definitions. I'm not afraid of it being confiscated.
That said, it's alright to be frightened by what might happen. Diligence on the part of the public is what will keep the 2nd amendment strong.
I'm just not ready to lose sleep over a congressman's offhand remark.
I believe it was far right commentator who said that the 1994 'assault weapon ban,' was somewhat toothless, but it was a necessary preparatory step for a real ban on assault style weapons.
We're going to get there eventually, as most of the world's advanced nations have, but we're not ready yet.
What is needed right now are common sense restrictions at the state level, as we just did here in WA by passing Initiative 1639. Eventually, yes, we will come to get your assault style weapons. But not just yet. A comment like that of Mr. Swalwell is simply one more small preparatory step.
The "we" in your statement has nothing to do with you. The spineless will always refer any real action to men and women in our military. Or LE.
The thing people like you don't understand is that a large swath of gun owners own the guns the spineless want banned are that exact same military.
Last edited by 1AngryTaxPayer; 11-18-2018 at 04:49 PM..
I think there's a whole lot of hysteria on both sides of the subject.
I'm old enough to have received mail order catalogs in the 60s peddling all manner of military surplus weapons. When that channel of purchasing was closed in 1968, it didn't hamper gun aficionados from purchasing whatever they desired. They just had to do it in person.
I'm old enough to recall more than five decades of hand wringing and jibber-jabbering over "they're coming to take my guns!" and in all those years it's been a cry of "the sky is falling!"
Yes, I personally own what would probably be considered an "assault rifle" by many definitions. I'm not afraid of it being confiscated.
That said, it's alright to be frightened by what might happen. Diligence on the part of the public is what will keep the 2nd amendment strong.
I'm just not ready to lose sleep over a congressman's offhand remark.
Those who choose to are welcome.
Well, I'm not quite as old as you, but I just recently lost the right to keep the 15 round magazines that I have for a 10/22. Yes, I can still use the gun, but am pretty pissed off. Fortunately, I have Pennsylvania, but for those who don't, they'll have to relinquish their property. While living in NY, I had to either sell, modify, or register my "assault weapon". Upon registering, I do not get to pass it down when I die (like I get to do with the rest of my property). So in its original state, it would have been confiscated in a few years. Just because the state police didn't come to my door yesterday doesn't negate what's happening.
Baby steps, tiny bites, slow boil, and all the while they'll still be saying, "No one wants to take your guns."
Well, I'm not quite as old as you, but I just recently lost the right to keep the 15 round magazines that I have for a 10/22. Yes, I can still use the gun, but am pretty pissed off. Fortunately, I have Pennsylvania, but for those who don't, they'll have to relinquish their property. While living in NY, I had to either sell, modify, or register my "assault weapon". Upon registering, I do not get to pass it down when I die (like I get to do with the rest of my property). So in its original state, it would have been confiscated in a few years. Just because the state police didn't come to my door yesterday doesn't negate what's happening.
Baby steps, tiny bites, slow boil, and all the while they'll still be saying, "No one wants to take your guns."
And yet, you choose to remain in a state with those regulations.
Well, I'm not quite as old as you, but I just recently lost the right to keep the 15 round magazines that I have for a 10/22. Yes, I can still use the gun, but am pretty pissed off. Fortunately, I have Pennsylvania, but for those who don't, they'll have to relinquish their property. While living in NY, I had to either sell, modify, or register my "assault weapon". Upon registering, I do not get to pass it down when I die (like I get to do with the rest of my property). So in its original state, it would have been confiscated in a few years. Just because the state police didn't come to my door yesterday doesn't negate what's happening.
Baby steps, tiny bites, slow boil, and all the while they'll still be saying, "No one wants to take your guns."
Thats why its SO important for everyone to REFUSE TO COMPLY, at every little step. If we give in and/or compromise on the 'little things', we are that much more likely to give in with the more important stuff later on down the road.
I cannot recall his name at the moment, but the man who shot police when they tried to come take his guns...this guy should be an inspiration for everyone else, thats what patriotism is folks, its standing up, fighting back, doing things that are not popular, doing things that are very risky, etc etc. These are the kinds of things future generations celebrate and honor people for!
Short review of the foundation of American law - - -" We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Hapiness. --That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed..."
--- Declaration of Independence, 1776
I had to rack my brain remembering this USSC case but got it, from Meyer v. Nebraska;
Quote:
While this Court has not attempted to define with exactness the liberty thus guaranteed, the term has received much consideration and some of the included things have been definitely stated. Without doubt, it denotes not merely freedom from bodily restraint, but also the right of the individual to contract, to engage in any of the common occupations of life, to acquire useful knowledge, to marry, establish a home and bring up children, to worship God according to the dictates of his own conscience, and generally to enjoy those privileges long recognized at common law as essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men.
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.
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.
