Is fear of confiscation valid?

Thinking that the same government that is giving us these rights today, is going take all of them away tomorrow with a total confiscation of all firearms is paranoia.
Click to expand...
If we assume that the government grants rights, it devalues the very concept and makes it easier to abrogate them in the future. The government is expected to respect pre-existing rights.

The majority of sentiment towards firearms in this country has been shown to be positive lately as folks that were once apathetic towards gun ownership are now endorsing it because of fear of loosing that right.
Click to expand...
We don't really know that. Polls are only so useful for measuring these things, and as our opponents have shown, the numbers can be twisted to fit any conclusion. Furthermore, people who respond only to a pressing issue in the present (I'm talking about the post-Newtown impulse buyers) can't be counted on for long-term advocacy. In fact, they can't be counted on to engage in any sort of meaningful action.

What we have at the moment is a reprieve, not a victory.
 
buck460XVR said:
I truly believe it will take house by house searches for Americans to give up their guns. Any registration done now would only give owners information on new guns bought from FFLs that have to be registered when sold and those very few guns that honest folks might actually register. Those would leave multiple millions of firearms in multiple millions of homes that would not be registered.....and this is just those owned by otherwise law abiding citizens.
Click to expand...
have you heard about the new I594 law passed in Washington state?
 
have you heard about the new I594 law passed in Washington state?
Click to expand...


Yes I have. That bill was first proposed a year a half before it went to the voters. The blame there lies not with the government or the legislator that proposed the bill, but those that went to the polls and voted on it. Sometimes, we are our own worst enemy.
 
buck460XVR said:
Thinking that the same government that is giving us these rights today, is going take all of them away tomorrow with a total confiscation of all firearms is paranoia. The chipping away of our rights has been slowed and put in reverse.
Click to expand...


buck460XVR said:
Yes I have. That bill was first proposed a year a half before it went to the voters. The blame there lies not with the government or the legislator that proposed the bill, but those that went to the polls and voted on it. Sometimes, we are our own worst enemy.
Click to expand...

doesnt I594 passing seem to nullify any idea of reversing the chipping away of our rights? I594 is now a way to track and register firarms still out of the FICS program.


buck460XVR said:
As for the "not being able to use them". Hunting is not only ingrained in this country and the rest of the world as a form of recreation, but as the most effective way to regulate animal numbers.
Click to expand...
to clarify, were not talking about hunting firearms were talking about arms... such as military pattern firearms like the AR15.
 
The blame there lies not with the government or the legislator that proposed the bill, but those that went to the polls and voted on it.
Click to expand...
The problem is, they don't have to go to the polls in Washington state. Ballots are cast by mail. If gun owners were the focused, united voting bloc many assume them to be, there would have been more opposition to it.

As it is, I-594 isn't the end of it. It's the beginning. Similar bills are coming up in Nevada, New Mexico, and Montana in the near future. Governor McAuliffe will soon be presenting a package of proposals, including "universal background checks," in Virginia.
 
to clarify, were not talking about hunting firearms were talking about arms... such as military pattern firearms like the AR15.
Click to expand...


This is the first time you, the OP, has made any mention that you were specifically talking about AR15s exclusively. Are you saying that only those platforms are to be registered and prone thus to confiscation? Are not most all hunting firearms taken from previous military platforms? Or are you only concerned with military style firearms?

The problem is, they don't have to go to the polls in Washington state. Ballots are cast by mail. If gun owners were the focused, united voting bloc many assume them to be, there would have been more opposition to it.
Click to expand...

Ballots cast by mail or in person are still ballots cast. Being able to cast votes by mail means it should have been easier to get apathetic voters to vote. The people in Washington state endorsed the bill by voting for it or not voting against it. They are the reason it passed. They are the problem, not how votes are cast.
 
buck460XVR said:
This is the first time you, the OP, has made any mention that you were specifically talking about AR15s exclusively. Are you saying that only those platforms are to be registered and prone thus to confiscation? Are not most all hunting firearms taken from previous military platforms? Or are you only concerned with military style firearms?
Click to expand...
Im talking about arms in general, including but not limited to the AR15. I do agree that hunting firearms are taken from military platforms, so no Im not 'only' concerned with military style arms necessarily but "taken from" doesnt mean designed for military or defensive use.... technically nobody needs to hunt with an AR15. My topic is in reference to second amendment issues regarding confiscation of arms not hunting or recreation priveleges, I just wasnt certain what you were referring to when you said hunting being ingrained in this country as recreation.
 
Buck460XVR said:
Ballots cast by mail or in person are still ballots cast. Being able to cast votes by mail means it should have been easier to get apathetic voters to vote. The people in Washington state endorsed the bill by voting for it or not voting against it. They are the reason it passed. They are the problem, not how votes are cast.
Click to expand...
What difference does it make, in the context of the discussion for THIS thread, how the law got passed? How the law came to be voted in is not the problem. The law is the problem. The law is now on the books and can be enforced by the police. THAT's the problem.
 
I think the fear is real, say there is a another New Orleans type situation, you have massive undocumented confiscation, then owners try to reclaim their guns-but can't prove ownership.
 
http://hotair.com/archives/2014/11/...ter-funerals-to-look-for-guns/comment-page-1/

Well there’s a comforting thought for you. There’s just been a death in the family, visitors are in from out of town, your aunts have brought over dishes of pasta and salads and are gathered in the living room sipping coffee and talking about happier days with the dearly departed. And then there’s a knock on the door. You get up to answer it and you find uniformed officers standing there with a warrant wanting to know where the guns previously registered to the individual who has shuffled off this mortal coil might be.

Of course, this is the region around Buffalo. It’s the same general area where enthusiastic law enforcement officials and legal scholars removed the guns from the home of David Lewis. (There’s an adventure in gun confiscation if you’ve never read it.)

When my father passed away he left my brother and I what would, even by cautious terms, be called an arsenal. Nobody came to the door. Nobody asked what would happen to the weapons. They were passed on, as they have always been, with the rest of the estate. Some of them are now in the hands of the next generation. But no more, it seems. New York is ready to scour every corner looking for any weapons which might not have every last bit of paperwork filed in advance and checked in with the Powers That Be.
 
And everybody assumes the warrant is valid, it was signed by someone with the authority to do so, etc. And of course everything will be properly inventoried-and signed for.
 
We Know NSA is doing MASSIVE collection of phone DATA. THere are claims back and forth as to exactly what about who and what they need to record actual calls or if they are even recording any actual calls/texts/e-mails, etc. Does anyone really believe what they are limiting themselves in the way they say they are?

Well, are any of us totally convinced they aren't recording phone calls from every gun shop in the US? Every NICS check is read over the phone. Compared to some of the other things that they have supposedly monitored I think recording every call from every gun shop would be small beans. With things like gunwalker, fast and furious, etc, would there be some supposedly "legitimate" and "legal" reasons to do so?

If they were, would those records come anywhere close to the current restriction on document destruction? Would anyone at NSA have even considered it? If they considered it and thought they should do it, would they take the time? Risk the waves? The records would likely be kept as much due to negligence/laziness as malice(yes, I consider intentionally subverting a god given right malicious). THe government does these things as much out of ineffectiveness as intent to subvert rights. Remember when one ATFE office started requesting copies of ffl records by mail so they could perform audits without sending agents to the FFLs physical location? It wasn't with the intent to subvert rights, just a mix of ineptitude, laziness, and lack of foresight.
With voice recognition to text software could someone possibly convert that recorded audio to a database? More easily than seizing all the FFL records and digitizing them at least.

I'm not saying it is happening, or even that I am especially worried about the possibility for me personally. Just that it would not surprise me if all I have outlined above is happening. It mostly doesn't bother me because I have a C&R license, am on and off involved in 2A rights groups, and other things that probably already put me towards the top of the list. How could we possibly prove it was happening? How could they convince me it wasn't?

I was unaware an FFL could destroy records after 20 years. I thought they had to be kept for the duration of the license then submitted to ATFE at closing.
 
Last edited:
kreyzhorse said:
Just google the New York Safe Act, it's pretty much a register, confiscate and or gun ban scheme.

It was passed in the dead of night without allowing a public review.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/NY_SAFE_Act
Click to expand...
So was Connecticut's post-Sandy Hook package of gun laws.

I understand both the NY SAFE Act and the Shew v Malloy (CT) cases had oral arguments in court on December 9. Has anyone seen or heard any feedback regarding how the oral arguments went?
 
I've always said gun confiscation is not going to happen, simply because it would mean kicking in the door of every home in the country at 4:00 AM, and not once, but two or three times, to get them all, together with searching through every moving van on the interstate, and stopping every car on the highway at random times and places for about 10 years, to get them 'all'.

We wouldn't stand for that kind of behavior from an occupying enemy army or our own government, whether we own guns or not.

It's not going to happen on a national level.

Some of the states are trying to get away with it, though. We'll see how long such things are under the radar, when a family is shot up or the wrong house is stormed once too often, that's going to change.

Having said that, I don't ever want to see them get the chance. Get involved in your Second Amendment rights and join a lobbying organization.
 
No difference at all. The Volstead Act, known as Prohibition, resulted in quite a bit of liquor confiscation and destruction. Can't have one without the other, prohibiting gun possession with no power to confiscate one certainly isn't going to make much sense.
 
Whats the difference between confiscation and prohibition?
Click to expand...
Prohibition: one is forbidden from acquiring or possessing something.

Confiscation: one is forbidden from possessing something, and active effort is being made to take it away.
 
well hey, at least with confiscation I wont become a felon behind bars if I let them take it right?

same thing.

They dont need to go door to door. How many laws are there now regarding lawful use of guns? Next thing you know you wont even be able to let your friend borrow one.....
 
We wouldn't stand for that kind of behavior from an occupying enemy army or our own government, whether we own guns or not.
Click to expand...
What bothers me, is all these SWAT teams breaking into old folks homes at 3:00am just to kill them because they are gun owners. This has happened too many times to not just be random.

It just happened in GA. 3am, wife hears a fast moving vehicle pull in to the driveway and she starts screaming to her sleeping husband. He wakes up, groggily, grabs his firearm and goes to investigate. SWAT team shoots him dead then claims they must have received a "bogus" drug tip (no drugs were found).

One of the bullets had entered the BACK of his head. He was on the ground already shot when they made sure it was permanent.

These are some scary times...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top