Here is how I would do it if I was a power hungry evil government stooge

Discussion in 'Legal and Activism' started by Kimber45, May 18, 2010.

  1. Kimber45

    Kimber45 New Member

    261
    0
    0
    1. Ban all fire arms and require that all firearms be turned in at your local police station within 30 days.
    2. Anyone caught with a firearm after 30 days gets 10 years hard labor.
    3. Anyone who has a registered firearm that doesn't turn it in within 30 days cannot receive any government benefit, be it a drivers liscense, welfare, unemployment, medicare, etc. Also, they will be fined $1000 a day for every day after 30 that they haven't turned in the weapon. The money will be automatically deducted from your paycheck/bank accounts/401K. Any fines that you don't pay will result in siezure of your assets. Bank accounts, house, car, etc. Your children will have to be taken from you as well because you can't care for them and will become wards of the state.
    4. Anyone who provides information to law enforcement that results in the confiscation of a firearm will receive a bounty of $10,000.
    5. If someone tells a law enforcement official that you have a firearm, you will be required to turn it in to the police within 30 days or you will be treated as in item #3. It will be assumed that you have a firearm whether you do or not.

    I wouldn't even bother with house to house searches.


    Borrowed this from another site. Yes, I know it wouldn't work today but . . . Give the socialist another couple years and maybe. As Norman Thomas said this in a 1944 speech:
    “The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism. But, under the name of “liberalism,” they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program, until one day America will be a socialist nation, without knowing how it happened.” He went on to say: “I no longer need to run as a Presidential Candidate for the Socialist Party. The Democratic Party has adopted our platform.”
     
  2. c3shooter

    c3shooter Administrator Staff Member

    21,344
    222
    63
    For those of us that live in the free states, could you pleae explain what this "registered firearm" thing is??? :confused:




    Note- for the Cognizant impaired, the foregoing WAS sarcasm.:p
     

  3. Rick1967

    Rick1967 Well-Known Member

    4,991
    48
    48
    Perhaps I am a little uniformed. But I was under the impression that dealers keep your information after the sale. There has to be a reason for that. I believe everyone needs a couple of guns bought from private parties.
     
  4. Kimber45

    Kimber45 New Member

    261
    0
    0
    I've a friend in Idaho, when he wants a firearm he gives the cash to one of his friends and they go buy it for him. I don't think he has one firearm, and he owns close to a 100, that has his name on it anywhere. Paper trails are dangerous.
     
  5. robocop10mm

    robocop10mm Lifetime Supporting Member Lifetime Supporter

    11,380
    1
    0
    And straw purchases are illegal.
     
  6. skullcrusher

    skullcrusher New Member

    10,888
    1
    0
    Your friend in Idaho is a felon and a bad name for legal ownership of firearms. Do you call him, e-mail him, text him or snail mail him? If so, you have just provided an electronic trail to him. :eek:
     
  7. Kimber45

    Kimber45 New Member

    261
    0
    0
    Legal gun owners? LOL! All laws on the ownership of firearms are unconstitutional, hence illegal, read your constitution. What part of 'shall not be infringed' do you find difficult to understand?
     
  8. skullcrusher

    skullcrusher New Member

    10,888
    1
    0
    Oh, I get it. You are one of those. But if you are trying to use that as a disclaimer to your friend making straw purchases, then I wish him luck.

    Tell us more about your friend. Where in Idaho does he live?
     
  9. pandamonium

    pandamonium New Member

    1,601
    0
    0
    Don't get me wrong here, I agree that gun laws are unconstitutional, however these laws ARE on the books and untill the day that they are not then it is as Skull said. No ifs ands or buts about it.
     
  10. dunerunner

    dunerunner New Member

    8,411
    3
    0
    I have given firearms as gifts! Just as I would if I had bought a car and given it to my son for graduation!! :D

    As for the OP's scenario, they'd get the guns I have; bullets first!
     
  11. NGIB

    NGIB New Member

    7,143
    1
    0
    Do you really think you do gun owners and law abiding citizens any favors by posting this crap? It's stuff like this that provides the liberals the ammo they need to further their agenda. A law is a law regardless of whether you agree with it or not. There are a lot of self-professed constitutional scholars serving time...
     
    Last edited: May 19, 2010
  12. bkt

    bkt New Member

    6,964
    0
    0
    FFLs are required to keep 4473 forms for quite some time, but in many states it is legal to sell firearms to others in that state in face-to-face deals. In New York, long guns may be sold ftf thus leaving no usable paper trail. Handguns, however, are registered -- specific serial numbers to an individual -- and cannot be transferred to another person without changing both people's permits.

    Given the climate today, I'm not too worried about a gun grab attempt. That would be more than enough to start something very big and very nasty.
     
  13. bkt

    bkt New Member

    6,964
    0
    0
    You make a good point, but so does Kimber45 in a roundabout way. 2A does not read: "The right of the people to keep and bear firearms of a reasonable nature for personal defense, hunting and sporting shall not be infringed." but that's how it has been interpreted over the years, resulting in many screwed up laws. We have only ourselves to blame for not stopping the first infringement.

    How many people here would obey a law requiring you to turn in all your firearms or register all your ammo or turn in your reloading equipment and supplies? I wouldn't. And I hope no one here would.

    Legislators have turned good, upstanding, law-abiding citizens into felons at the stroke of a pen in the past and they will try to do it again at some point.
     
  14. NGIB

    NGIB New Member

    7,143
    1
    0
    The fact of the matter is the law is the law. There are proper ways to get bad laws stricken from the books. Just choosing to ignore the laws you don't agree with is not something that anyone should condone. I do not think anyone on this forum should even tacitly agree that breaking the law - even a bad law - is a proper course of action.

    Let me expand a bit. Let's say you are 40 years old, own your own business, and you're a pillar of the community. Now lets say that when you were 18, you were busted for smoking a joint - at home with no bad extenuating circumstances. You received a misdemeanor conviction, paid the fine, and have never been in any trouble with the law again.

    You move your business to Georgia and you'd like to get your GA Firearms License as you believe in defending yourself and your family. Guess what - under current GA law you will NEVER be allowed to obtain a GFL (carry permit) as you have a drug related offense on your record. Is this law fair & just - no I don't think so - but it is the law. If the Governor signs SB308, which passed the GA house & senate and is on his desk, this bad law goes away. This is how bad laws go away - the legal way - that is the basis for our great nation.

    The Supreme Court has had a lot of opportunities over the years to see the "shall not be infringed" just as Kimber45 and bkt does - they have chosen not to. Until such a time comes that they do - we law abiding citizens are stuck with their interpretation - even if we do not agree...
     
    Last edited: May 19, 2010
  15. AcidFlashGordon

    AcidFlashGordon New Member

    1,657
    0
    0
    Firearm registration isn't too much sarcasm when it comes to Clark County, Nevada. For all handguns we own, we are required by Clark County "regulations" to register them with the sheriff's department. We have a small blue card (most of us call it the Nazi Blue Card) that has to be on our person for any of the handguns we are carrying around. This is not a CCW which is a completely different animal. Clark County is the only county in Nevada that requires this Nazi Blue Card. The current sheriff, Gillespie, claims it helps in solving homicides by handgun. I think one has been solved in the past 5 years.

    I've got 4 of the buggers currently. I'm going to be supremely glad when I retire and move to Texas. I might head down to the sheriff's station, on my way out of town, and burn those cards on the steps.
     
  16. luke1249

    luke1249 New Member

    14
    0
    0
    Well said. A lot of people seem to think if only we got the right people in office or the right people on the Supreme Court, we could go back to some kind of Wild West mode of life where licenses don't exist and a group of homesteaders could band together and string up the local sheriff if he was doing bad things.

    Times have changed. The government has helicopters and SWAT teams. In this day and age, the idea that you can fight government oppression with a personal armory is pure comic-book fantasy. Luckily, we don't live in a totalitarian state and are nowhere near to living in one (trust me, I have, and I know). If you don't like a law, get active. Organize. Get it changed. That's what democracy is.

    But forget ever having more control than the government. Nine Alitos on the Supreme Court couldn't change that. Nine Ted Nugents on the Supreme Court couldn't change that. It's just the world we live in.
     
  17. pandamonium

    pandamonium New Member

    1,601
    0
    0
    I'm wondering, if, since the SCOTUS has ruled in the Heller case that 2A is an Individual right ( I still don't know where all the discussion comes from in the first place), the fact of this ruling SHOULD, without exception, assure and confirm the right of all law abiding citizens to carry, either open or discrete, in ALL States (yes, even hell jersey!). What I understand is the SCOTUS will now work on WHICH gun laws are unconstitutional,as if there is actually a question.
     
  18. Yunus

    Yunus New Member

    5,250
    0
    0
    I'm no lawyer but I thought part of the limitation of Heller was that it applied to DC only because of it's special status as not a state. Now if the new case going to the court from Chicago or Illinois goes the same way it might apply more broadly. However the SCOTUS brief is not black and white like sometimes stated.

    Someone who knows more please clarify but I thought Heller basically said that the banning of an entire class of weapons commonly used for defense purposes was illegal. So if DC say's you can't purchase or own 1911's in our district but can have most other pistols that might actually be legal.
     
  19. clip11

    clip11 New Member

    178
    0
    0
    Well in past times, people have broke unjust laws and there breaking them allwed for them to be changed. A few examples:

    1. Rosa Parks refusing to move in front of the bus. Now I know some people say this was staged, but for the purpose of this discussion, we'll assume it wasnt.

    2. The Boston Tea Party. Refusing to pay high taxes to the king of England

    The only thing about breaking unjust laws is that enough people have to be on board with it. One person doing it wont result in anything but you getting in trouble. Personally I dont think people should need a cpl to carry a concealed pistol if they can legally own one. And if I were in Alaska, New Hampshire, or Arizona the law would agree with me. But in Michigan they give you 2 to 5 years for that even if you legally own the pistol.

    So for one person to do it on purpose to rebel, that may be stupid, but if lets say, five hundred thousand or a million legal Michigan gun owners were to organize an event where they were to go in public with concealed pistols w/o a license to make a point, I would support that.
     
  20. skullcrusher

    skullcrusher New Member

    10,888
    1
    0
    While I agree that there are cases where unjust laws were brought into the limelight through disobedience, I must disagree with the choices of your examples.

    Don't misunderstand, I do believe that civil disobedience is a valid method of bringing unjust laws and ordinances into the public eye.

    1. Rosa Parks refused to move to the back of the bus, and it was an organized act that was not illegal. The Civil Rights Movement was already well underway.

    2. The Boston Tea Party was a vandalous act that had nothing to do with actual taxation. Have you ever asked why the participants attempted to disguise themselves as Native Americans?

    Now, if you want to think of a bold act that was treasonous at the time, think about the signing of the Declaration of Independence.
     
    Last edited: May 19, 2010