Gunowners - would you "give up" your guns under federal law?

[IceBergSLiM]

It was still signed it Law. Doesn't matter if it was passed in the dead of night.

time will tell. I don't think this law will be upheld ....I'm certain their are already cases open with the supreme court.

I donated to that guys legal fund.

 

[airdata]

Otherwise anti-criminals conspiring on a message board about committing crime.

Love you guys.

 

[IceBergSLiM]

It is just a start. They gun grabbers are just geting warmed up.

they've tried and failed before. Without an implementation plan its still a non-starter.

 

[cwjerome]

I wouldn't die over the government taking my firearms, but I would never turn them in voluntarily.

 

[IceBergSLiM]

Otherwise anti-criminals conspiring on a message board about committing crime.

Love you guys.

conspiring not found

 

[Phanuel]

What guns? (nope)

 

[irishScott]

It was still signed it Law. Doesn't matter if it was passed in the dead of night.

I'm saying New York is its own animal. Sometimes it has the arrogance to think it's "the model" for the rest of the US, but just because something happens in New York doesn't mean it will inevitably happen elsewhere.

Granted that doesn't mean we should be complacent, but gun ownership is actually growing and gun sales have skyrocketed. Video games have, if only virtually, exposed an entire generation to military-style guns and associated them with fun. Gun control as we know it is very much a previous generation phenomenon, much like the anti gay marriage movements.

Add in Constitutional protections that SCOTUS has established, and gun owners in general are gaining a significant advantage IMO. Never mind that the gun community has more political endurance/fervor than its adversaries. Just look at the power of the NRA vs the Brady Campaign, and I'm certain pro-gunners write more letters to Washington.

We have to keep up the pressure, but the gun community has long proven its ability and willingness to do so in a way rarely seen over political causes. I'm optimistic our message will win through.

 

[Brovane]

I'm saying New York is its own animal. Sometimes it has the arrogance to think it's "the model" for the rest of the US, but just because something happens in New York doesn't mean it will inevitably happen elsewhere.

Granted that doesn't mean we should be complacent, but gun ownership is actually growing and gun sales have skyrocketed. Video games have, if only virtually, exposed an entire generation to military-style guns and associated them with fun. Gun control as we know it is very much a previous generation phenomenon, much like the anti gay marriage movements.

Add in Constitutional protections that SCOTUS has established, and gun owners in general are gaining a significant advantage IMO. Never mind that the gun community has more political endurance/fervor than its adversaries. Just look at the power of the NRA vs the Brady Campaign, and I'm certain pro-gunners write more letters to Washington.

We have to keep up the pressure, but the gun community has long proven its ability and willingness to do so in a way rarely seen over political causes. I'm optimistic our message will win through.

My concern is that with a 5-4 decission in Heller that the margin is very small. All it takes is one pro-gun justice retiring and having a Democrat president appointing a justice who has a different view on the 2nd Amendment and potentially the next case going all the way to SCOTUS will be treated differently.

 

[klinc]

I can see the ATF smoking a couple of Cults out

 

[monovillage]

I don't own any firearms. What guns?

 

[PokerGuy]

My concern is that with a 5-4 decission in Heller that the margin is very small. All it takes is one pro-gun justice retiring and having a Democrat president appointing a justice who has a different view on the 2nd Amendment and potentially the next case going all the way to SCOTUS will be treated differently.

This, exactly.

There are two different angles to the gun control issue. On the one hand, you have the political situation, where it's clear that in the near future the gun grabbers will not be able to get rid of the 2nd. They will continue to try to exploit any tragedy they can to chip away at people's rights, but the legal gun owners are a fairly strong political group.

The other side is the SCOTUS angle. Put enough idiots like the ones that have been recently added on the court, and you could easily get the court to essentially throw out the 2nd by some insane 'logic' that it doesn't apply to anyone. Bam, headshot to all legal citizens wanting to legally bear arms or protect themselves.

Heller was only 5-4.....

 

[exdeath]

It was still signed it Law. Doesn't matter if it was passed in the dead of night.

Can sign a law that makes it illegal to consume oxygen, doesn't mean anybody gives a shit.

 

[sigurros81]

this, exactly.

There are two different angles to the gun control issue. On the one hand, you have the political situation, where it's clear that in the near future the gun grabbers will not be able to get rid of the 2nd. They will continue to try to exploit any tragedy they can to chip away at people's rights, but the legal gun owners are a fairly strong political group.

The other side is the scotus angle. Put enough idiots like the ones that have been recently added on the court, and you could easily get the court to essentially throw out the 2nd by some insane 'logic' that it doesn't apply to anyone. Bam, headshot to all legal citizens wanting to legally bear arms or protect themselves.

Heller was only 5-4.....

OMG, the humanity! Everybody panic now!!!! You should turn this into a script and try to sell it to Hollywood, would make for a good thriller.

 

[OCGuy]

I wonder how these red-neck moonshinin' gun-owners who would not be effected by any new weapons bans would vote on this poll:

http://chasthuglife.blogspot.com/2013/01/a-question-for-our-president.html

 

[OverVolt]

Realistically if they came door to door to raid for guns I would attempt to flee the country.

Even if you turned it in, everything would be getting very socialist. Which would mean the standard of living would plummet. I'd look for somewhere that is fed-up of socialism.

They can have the gun, then leave. Cause its all downhill from there.

 

[IceBergSLiM]

I wonder how these red-neck moonshinin' gun-owners who would not be effected by any new weapons bans would vote on this poll:

http://chasthuglife.blogspot.com/2013/01/a-question-for-our-president.html

^EmPlyang deY cuD rEeD dA pOlL !

 

[themusgrat]

I highly doubt a single of these guys would actually die with their firearms in their hands. If anything they'll be wetting their panties the moment ATF breaks down their doors--hypothetical of course....

Well sir, you just have another think coming, theoretically. Nobody is banning all guns. It's a stupid thought. It's stupid because it's wrong. This country was founded upon people being able to have whatever life they want. If they want to hunt, then that's fine. If they want to shoot at a range, that's fine. If they want to carry and protect their families, that's fine.

Owning firearms is a right that Americans have held dearly forever. It's listed only after the right to speak your mind. It is foundational to our way of life. You may not need a gun, and that's fine. However, history has shown, the strongest people are the people who can defend themselves. A complete gun ban will never come. It's sad that it's even a theoretical question. Even 50 years ago the thought was laughable.

 

[soundforbjt]

It's all a ploy by the NRA (should be called the GMA) to get you to buy more guns and it's working to perfection.

 

[sigurros81]

It's all a ploy by the NRA (should be called the GMA) to get you to buy more guns and it's working to perfection.

Pretty much. Haha. If anything, I think Obama has stock in firearm manufacturers. I have no concrete proof, but who needs proof when all you gotta do is look at the general mass. Gun stores are scraping the barrels, Sporting Good Stores are rationing ammo. Gun manufacturers are laughing all the way to the bank.

 

[Gillbot]

odd. same thing happened. they need to some laws about boat's they are deadly.



the govenment would have to start searching homes for weapons to seize them. this i gurentee is going to lead to more deaths then we have from guns now.

They should ban boats, the same thing happened to mine!

 

[IceBergSLiM]

Pretty much. Haha. If anything, I think Obama has stock in firearm manufacturers. I have no concrete proof, but who needs proof when all you gotta do is look at the general mass. Gun stores are scraping the barrels, Sporting Good Stores are rationing ammo. Gun manufacturers are laughing all the way to the bank.

In this economy its not a bad thing.

 

[Cerb]

I highly doubt a single of these guys would actually die with their firearms in their hands. If anything they'll be wetting their panties the moment ATF breaks down their doors--hypothetical of course....

Sure, but they'd be doing that without any new laws in place. If you think the ATF needs new laws to make bad decisions, you must be in a bubble. Since the end of Prohibition, the BATF has done more harm than good, but its leaders are far enough up the totem pole to be practically immune from reasonable consequences.

In fact, while some people would certainly die, if something so outlandish were to come down, the ATF as the enforcement wing would be perfect, so as to turn public opinion around .

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

No offense to the OP, but only an idiot would participate in this poll except to pick the "don't own any" option.

 

[OCGuy]

No offense to the OP, but only an idiot would participate in this poll except to pick the "don't own any" option.

There really isn't a need to be that paranoid about it, because it is never going to happen.

It is a hypothetical poll stating you would fight for your constitutional rights.

Besides, if you look at my link further up the thread, you will see blatant flaunting of illegal acts is common, and I doubt all of their doors were kicked in.

 

[sigurros81]

Sure, but they'd be doing that without any new laws in place. If you think the ATF needs new laws to make bad decisions, you must be in a bubble. Since the end of Prohibition, the BATF has done more harm than good, but its leaders are far enough up the totem pole to be practically immune from reasonable consequences.

In fact, while some people would certainly die, if something so outlandish were to come down, the ATF as the enforcement wing would be perfect, so as to turn public opinion around .

I didn't say anything about the ATF being a bastion of goodness and law.