When they come for our guns...
I just keep wondering...
In all this talk about the end of the 2A and blanket gun confiscations--who is going to enforce this, and how are they going to do it?
How many gun owners are there in the US?
Okay, now how many cops? And just how many of those cops are going to support this? (Hint: Surveys show that most cops are in favor of CCW.)
FBI and BATFE cops will probably be willing--but just how many of them
ARE there? Randy Weaver and his family in a cabin on Ruby Ridge is one thing--or even David Koresh and a few dozen followers in a few buildings outside of Waco--but are there enough Feds to disarm, say, all of Waco's citizens at once? I think if they put every Federal agent in the country on the job at the same time, they'd have a hard time covering even one good-sized neighborhood.
The local cops aren't likely to be much help; some of them LIVE in that neighborhood.
Will they try to use the Army? How many of THEM will be willing? (Hint: 80+% of the US Military reliably votes Republican.)
Going to Iraq or Afghanistan is one thing, but I suspect that when the word comes down that their unit is being deployed to Iowa City or Wichita Falls to take people's guns away, a heluva lot of soldiers are going to have "family emergencies" (or just turn up AWOL) so they can go home and help Mom and Dad keep their guns. Or maybe, "Gee, Lieutenant (*cough*), everyone in the company has the flu... (*cough*)Seems to be an epidemic, all over the base..."
Our troops are used to fighting people who speak a different language, wear funny clothes, and are trying to kill them. I doubt they'd be real happy about going after ordinary Americans in towns like the ones where they grew up.
In any case, if the Feds can't even do Waco all at once, what about the rest of the country? It would be AB-SO-LUTE-LY impossible to forcibly disarm the entire US of A on the same day; therefore, there are two alternatives:
(1) Just issue an order that everyone has to bring in their guns and ammunition and turn them over to the Authorities. How many of you will be ready to do that? Hands?
Hmmm. Can't see any from here. okay, that leaves:
(2) Disarm the people one neighborhood--or, optimistically, one city or county--at a time in any given area (leaving aside just how many areas could be disarmed at once, even if they managed to come up with some units that would actually do it).
Time to rise up and fight them off? Well, maybe--but why would that be necessary? My brother lives in Greenville, about half an hour's drive from here; I have cousins in central Texas, in the Panhandle, and all over. When they come for my guns--"Oh, sorry, Officer, I sold all my guns when I saw this coming down. Go ahead, search the place if you like..." and when they come for my brother's guns, they'll be here. Nonviolent resistance on a massive scale. And how could they stop it? Shut down the whole country and prohibit travel while the confiscations go on--for months?
Oh, if they catch me later, they can put me in jail? Right. Have you seen all the T-shirts that say "You can't deport us all"? There are a lot more gun owners than illegal aliens. You think the War on Drugs takes up a lot of law enforcement's time and energy? The War on Guns will make that look like enforcing the shoplifting laws.
Far be it from me to say there's nothing to worry about. We need to be vigilant. But...
Well, remember how well Prohibition worked out?
There were probably more people that started drinking then than at any time in US history. Lots of people made a good living from moonshining, rumrunning and owning or managing speakeasies--and EVERYBODY knew where they could get a drink. We Americans just don't change our habits that easily--especially when we're told we HAVE to, by the government or anyone else.
If Confiscation ever happens, it won't be over in one day, any more than Prohibition was. That battle will just be beginning, and will go on for years--and the antis will be on the defensive, and losing, from Day One of it.
If they DO try to take away our guns, get ready to become a firearms instructor--and an illegal gun dealer. There's going to be a huge demand for both.
Could you please cite the sources for the statistics that you're using?
They have been training military personel from other contries for years, they would never use our own to do the job on a scale that big, That way when you resist they will gun you down where you stand, an American service man would have a morale problem with that, A Russian or what ever would not!!! It is sad to say most will hand them right over opposed to putting there family at risk, there are a few die hards out there that they will have to fight to the death, but probably not as many as you would think, you have to first ask your self are you ready to become a fugitive from the law because you are going to have to drop the hammer on these SOB when the come knocken on your door, now you are wanted for murder, what kind of life would that be, as you know you cannot hide forever in this day in age, I hate to sound negetive but an less total anarchy breakes out and the whole country comes together as a hole you will be more alone than you have ever been in your life. They, the government run test on us to see how we will respond to differant things all the time, for instance Katrina, I did not hear one thing about any retaliation when the took law biding citizens firearmes in New Orleans, not one fatality, that means nobody was willing to stand up to them!!! now the government knowes that they can freely do what the set out to do with out any problems, Just like they did in the L.A. Riotes, you now that it is unconstitusional to use American troops on our soil against our own people, but they did it and what did we do, we cheeres because they brought peace, Again we let them know they can run all over our rights
The door-to-door method using local cops and the National Guard worked in New Orleans.
You would hope the majority of those being ordered to carry something like this out would refuse, but I'm pretty sure most would follow orders. They would be deployed away from their homes so they wouldn't be ordered to disarm friends or family.
There is no way I would turn any firearms over in a situation like you describe.
Before retirement, I had discussed this with many officers. The vast majority, at least in my area, would refuse the order. The ones who said they would follow orders, for the most part are either young brain-washed rookies, or administration types.
In 1995 there was a survey of US Marines, at 29 Palms in Calif., a copy of which is at the web page posted below. According to the web page, it was not a military-wide survey and was limited to just "a few hundred Marines" at 29 Palms. The survey was part of a Marine officer working on his Master's degree. The article lists the officer's rank as "Lt. Commander" which is Navy, and again as "lieutenant," which could be any branch. Could other items in the article be mistaken? Could it have been a trial baloon to see how a service-wide survey would go over?
The story does not say how the Marines voted.
The story and copy of survey are at;
Joint Services Training Combat Arms Survey
I continued looking, and found another, longer, version of the survey.
(That one is from a pretty far out web site, so you may want to take it with a pinch of salt.)
Another site has yet another version;
Google "JOINT SERVICES TRAINING COMBAT ARMS SURVEY" and you can chose from 105,000 hits. :eek:
Rickrem, you seem to be looking at the national domestic aspect of the movement only. Add the historical context - the lessons of the civilian weapons bans which fostered Korean martial arts, as well as the modern (1939+) efforts - to the autocratic globalism that has been festering since Marxist-Leninism. (Did you vote for the Secretary-General of the UN? Who did?) The autocratic advocates of gun confiscation take a very long view. Piecemeal, gradual, and obscure Treaty and Trade Agreement action will merely stand available for later application against an easily "demonizable" exemplar. (Remember the so-called SARS epidemic? Did you notice the quietly enacted legislation which allows medical quarantine without consent, habeus corpus, counsel, even a phone call?) Infantry in blue helmets is not likely. Your cousin losing his voting privilege for the new felony of possession of venison is likely; my being found by thru-the-wall infrared thermography to have an old Mossberg 500 is likely; will ground - penetrating radar locate some short sections of PVC pipe in your back yard ;) .
In the near term - say, five to seven years - abrupt and catastrophic economic collapse is almost unavoidable. (For the first time in [U]my[U] life the Canadian dollar is worth more than the USD.) Don't take my word for it; study history - I suggest that the pre-Hitler Weimar Republic may be instructive. That may seem to be off the thread, but my point is that helicopters-with-no-tail-numbers coming for your rifle is not imminent unless you give them some other pretext.
Can they really do that? To legally confiscate our weapons,wouldan't they have to amend the constitution?
And what about the money involved? Sales from Imported weapons,along with domestic companies is much,much to high to just stop...the government these days seems like they let big buisness rule most of their decisions as of late [Refering to the pharmacutical conspiracys about the FDA]. Theres to much cash flow to just put a stop to it all in one day..That violates the free enterprise acts as well. Alot has to be voted on in congress and the senate to even begin to pass such a law...
And even so,even if a law such as that comes to pass,and they amend the constitution. I'm sure the public will be well aware of it and be taking apropriate steps to keep their guns.
Say,worst case scenario..they do amend the constitution and the men in uniforms came for our weapons,chances are,yes,in many larger cities,people will give them up willingly. However,in small backwater,hick towns,much like the one I inhabit,where everyone has a 22 or a 12 gauge,drinks beer every day,and flies a rebel flag...I think they'lle be fighting house to house. If they run over our rights,IMO,they can rule our lives..and quite frankly,I'll be shacking up with my dad and grandfather,making a stand against it..they'lle have to pry our weapons from our cold dead hands...at least we'll go down fighting for what we believe is right....
"The Thing I treasure most in life,cannot be taken away,there will never be a reason why,I should surrender to your advice to,change myself I'd rather die,knowing they'lle not understand. I won't make the greatest sacrafice,you can't predict where the outcome lies,you'lle never take me alive" Chorus from "Alive" by Disturbed
I treasure my rights the most,and I dang sure won't give 'em up while I can still cock and fire my weapon.
Blackwater 'troops' were pointing weapons at citizens in order to take said citizens' weapons away from them. when you've got paid mercenaries on our own soil taking weapons from citizens, then this country has more problems than you think.
you did see this, right?:
California Emergency Powers Bill Signed Into Law
Thursday, October 18, 2007
Fairfax, VA - California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger has signed into law National Rifle Association (NRA)-backed legislation to prevent the confiscation of firearms from law-abiding Californians during a future state of emergency or natural disaster, as happened in New Orleans in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. Assembly Bill 1645 was introduced in the General Assembly by Assemblyman Doug LaMalfa (R-2).
“In passing this law, Assemblyman LaMalfa and California’s General Assembly acted to protect the rights of law-abiding gun owners when their rights are most vital,” said Chris W. Cox, NRA’s chief lobbyist. “During a time when there is no 9-1-1 or police upon which to rely, honest citizens will never again have to worry that their only means of self protection from looters or thugs will be taken away by the government.”
After Hurricane Katrina, the New Orleans Police Superintendent issued orders to confiscate all firearms- including those from law-abiding residents. With that single order, he stripped the only means of self-protection innocent citizens had during a time of widespread civil disorder. This legislation guarantees those actions will never happen in California.
AB 1645 passed the State Assembly unanimously and 21 to 16 in the Senate, proving that Second Amendment rights during a state of emergency are highly regarded by California lawmakers.
“On behalf of our thousands of NRA members in California, I want to thank Assemblyman Doug LaMalfa for his leadership and commitment to bringing the “Emergency Powers” bill to passage in both chambers of the General Assembly,” concluded Cox. “His support was instrumental in seeing this fundamental protection signed into law.”
To do that legally would require repealing the Second Amendment and that could not happen with the support of the people today. The only way it could happen is if legislators pushed it through against the will of the people.
|All times are GMT. The time now is 11:23 AM.|
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.