SCOTUS - Same Sex Marriage a Right in Every State
-
let's see...New Zealand, 1921 the ownership of revolvers were allowed in the name of personal defense, 1970s this list was used to confiscate all revolvers.
Canada...registration list 1990s, old guns grandfathered in, but this list is used for the state to confiscate the guns upon the death of the holder with no compensation to the estate
1996 Australia used it's list of registered semiauto hunting rifles to confiscate all those weapons.
The UK government instituted handgun registration in 1921, and about every 10 years or so they further restrict what can be owned and use the registration rolls to collect what is illegal.
How about Chicago, put in registration of long guns, used that same registration to confiscate semiauto long guns in the early 1990s
What about California, couldn't make up it's mind if the SKS was covered or not (1989), decided AFTER the registration period was closed that they needed to be registered, declared a second 'grace period' for registration...then about 5 years ago they decided that those SKSs registered during the grace period were illegal because the grace period was illegal, and in certain cities and counties sent law enforcement to the listed addresses demanding surrender of the firearm. Because there is the legal option of removing the gun from the state of CA, and these officers had no warrants, smart gun owners turned them away with the claim 'I gave it to a relative in Oregon (or whatever)' but MANY were seized with no compensation. (Cities and counties later on offered compensation for anyone who had a receipt, but the police weren't giving out receipts, only a few people who demanded them had them and they were basically notes scribbled on whatever spare paper the officer had)
Side Note, the SKS was the MOST common weapon in the hands of Korean Shop Owners who used them to defend themselves and businesses when the LA riots happened. -
Drugs aren't registered, yet the police somehow know who's carrying and who isn't. Maybe there will be more 'random' spot checks to see who's carrying a gun, and if it's not registered, take the gun and fine the person.
The fact that you think the only way the police can do anything about anything is if the things are registered is very strange.
As for the licence fee being raised - what if it were free? But then, the government would have to pay *something* to keep the system in place. So how about it costs, let's say $50 for a 10 year licence, or some other agreeable fee, with stipulations to keep the fee from rising more than inflation?
You have a whole lot of counter-points that can easily be resolved with just a little common sense.
Not saying that the whole process would be easy, but it's doable if everyone weren't so paranoid. This isn't nazi germany, or china under mao. This is the 21st century, where America, aided by other UN countries, went to way to remove a dictator who was doing evil things to his people; where a president can only serve 8 years at most before someone else takes over - so there's only so much they can actually do. It would take years to get the infrastructure in place to do anything like your tinfoil hat post - I'm pretty sure if a president were to try that they wouldn't be re-elected after the first term; I'm pretty sure the army - who would need to be onside of course - wouldn't carry it out.
-
?
WSS
Basically. Not sure what his being an atheist has to do with much.
-
Private ownership of guns is the necessary component needed to fulfill the Jeffersonian mandate for national self-defense. Yet, increasingly and reminiscent of Nazi Germany, the United States government is incrementally chipping away at private citizens right to own a gun. This does doesn’t make sense because FBI statistics clearly show that 90% of the guns used in the commission of a crime are stolen! Does the government really believe that criminals, both American citizens and illegal aliens, as well as terrorists, are suddenly going to perform their civic duty and immediately register their guns? How is America better-served if the only ones who don’t have access to guns are the law-abiding citizens? So, one must ask who are the gun control laws designed to protect and why?
Finally, most would wonder what gun confiscation would look and feel like in America. No speculation is necessary because of the gun confiscations which took place in New Orleans in 2006 in the aftermath of Katrina. Any American who thinks that gun confiscation is a good idea, needs to desperately watch the following video.
Is this the government that you are going to accept? Even the most brainwashed of Americans cannot deny what you just watched on the preceding video. If we allow Obama to possess the ability to ban our guns, this is what you will likely see across the country and the potential for this to spread into a flash point for widespread violence, and even revolution, should be concerning to all of us. This issue, in my humble opinion, needs to be our line in the sand against this tyrannical government.
Historians generally agree that there are eight identifiable stages associated with an unfolding genocide. It would behoove all Americans to familiarize themselves with these stages in order to accurately assess the developing threat should gun confiscation ever become a reality. An analysis of the applicability of the eight stages of genocide to present day America will be the focus of the next part in this series.
-
The Korean shop owners should have defended their businesses by sending out strongly worded letters and waiting for the non-existent police presence to arrive.
-
So, Chris - your utopian liberal lala land nonsense flies out the window.
Trouble is, all you anti-gun silly people aren't on the board, and won't watch the video
I just posted.
-
Private ownership of guns is the necessary component needed to fulfill the Jeffersonian mandate for national self-defense. Yet, increasingly and reminiscent of Nazi Germany, the United States government is incrementally chipping away at private citizens right to own a gun. This does doesn’t make sense because FBI statistics clearly show that 90% of the guns used in the commission of a crime are stolen! Does the government really believe that criminals, both American citizens and illegal aliens, as well as terrorists, are suddenly going to perform their civic duty and immediately register their guns? How is America better-served if the only ones who don’t have access to guns are the law-abiding citizens? So, one must ask who are the gun control laws designed to protect and why?
Finally, most would wonder what gun confiscation would look and feel like in America. No speculation is necessary because of the gun confiscations which took place in New Orleans in 2006 in the aftermath of Katrina. Any American who thinks that gun confiscation is a good idea, needs to desperately watch the following video.
Is this the government that you are going to accept? Even the most brainwashed of Americans cannot deny what you just watched on the preceding video. If we allow Obama to possess the ability to ban our guns, this is what you will likely see across the country and the potential for this to spread into a flash point for widespread violence, and even revolution, should be concerning to all of us. This issue, in my humble opinion, needs to be our line in the sand against this tyrannical government.
Historians generally agree that there are eight identifiable stages associated with an unfolding genocide. It would behoove all Americans to familiarize themselves with these stages in order to accurately assess the developing threat should gun confiscation ever become a reality. An analysis of the applicability of the eight stages of genocide to present day America will be the focus of the next part in this series.
-
?
WSS
Basically. Not sure what his being an atheist has to do with much.
-
So, watch the video Chris. But there are too many police depts out there
who are willing to treat Americans like stormtroopers, living
on total power over people.
Oops, and I see you just made a liberalasusual stupidass joke about the video,
which you probably won't watch, because liberals emotionally vent about issues,
and hate valid information to the contrary of their emotions.
Yes, Bush was president during Katrina. But the gov was a lefty liberal
democrat. Man up and discuss the content of the video instead of redirecting in
any way possible. So, yes, it WAS the liberal state gov that did the brownshirts
intimidation of honest, innocent Americans, and confiscation of their guns.
Now, those guns weren't even registered - and think how many times this would happen
if these dirty bastard "police" knew where all the guns were?
Bush was a very, very pro-2nd Amendment president. It's the gov who calls out the
troops.
Read up on Kathleen Blanco, the DEMOCRAT liberal governor who screwed up the
Katrina relief situation. SHE declared the emergency. And SHE refused to let
the National Guard come in to help, and SHE refused to even let the RED CROSS
come in.
And, as lefty libs do, she blamed Bush for his lack of assistance, making a bogus
complaint for political reasons.
Backfired, she lost all support and didn't run for reelection, knowing she ruined her own reputation.
-
Drugs aren't registered, yet the police somehow know who's carrying and who isn't. Maybe there will be more 'random' spot checks to see who's carrying a gun, and if it's not registered, take the gun and fine the person.
The fact that you think the only way the police can do anything about anything is if the things are registered is very strange.
As for the licence fee being raised - what if it were free? But then, the government would have to pay *something* to keep the system in place. So how about it costs, let's say $50 for a 10 year licence, or some other agreeable fee, with stipulations to keep the fee from rising more than inflation?
You have a whole lot of counter-points that can easily be resolved with just a little common sense.
Not saying that the whole process would be easy, but it's doable if everyone weren't so paranoid. This isn't nazi germany, or china under mao. This is the 21st century, where America, aided by other UN countries, went to way to remove a dictator who was doing evil things to his people; where a president can only serve 8 years at most before someone else takes over - so there's only so much they can actually do. It would take years to get the infrastructure in place to do anything like your tinfoil hat post - I'm pretty sure if a president were to try that they wouldn't be re-elected after the first term; I'm pretty sure the army - who would need to be onside of course - wouldn't carry it out.
Drugs aren't registered, yet the police somehow know who's carrying and who isn't. Maybe there will be more 'random' spot checks to see who's carrying a gun, and if it's not registered, take the gun and fine the person.
The fact that you think the only way the police can do anything about anything is if the things are registered is very strange.
As for the licence fee being raised - what if it were free? But then, the government would have to pay *something* to keep the system in place. So how about it costs, let's say $50 for a 10 year licence, or some other agreeable fee, with stipulations to keep the fee from rising more than inflation?
You have a whole lot of counter-points that can easily be resolved with just a little common sense.
Not saying that the whole process would be easy, but it's doable if everyone weren't so paranoid. This isn't nazi germany, or china under mao. This is the 21st century, where America, aided by other UN countries, went to way to remove a dictator who was doing evil things to his people; where a president can only serve 8 years at most before someone else takes over - so there's only so much they can actually do. It would take years to get the infrastructure in place to do anything like your tinfoil hat post - I'm pretty sure if a president were to try that they wouldn't be re-elected after the first term; I'm pretty sure the army - who would need to be onside of course - wouldn't carry it out.
The police use a lot of evil awful racial profiling and just profiling in general when they "somehow know who's carrying"
-
I did watch the video. They were heavy handed with the old lady, and probably overzealous in taking the guns from everybody. But, I suspect they basically declared marshal law, given the amount of looting. I don't really know enough about the situation to comment. Do you know if the people of NO now have the right to their guns again? Of course, it's difficult to return the guns to the owners, since they weren't registered...
Also, just to clarify, while the mayor was a democrat, that was under a republican government.
-
reposting what Cal posted:
What are some examples of where gun registration lead to gun confiscation?
let's see...New Zealand, 1921 the ownership of revolvers were allowed in the name of personal defense, 1970s this list was used to confiscate all revolvers.
Canada...registration list 1990s, old guns grandfathered in, but this list is used for the state to confiscate the guns upon the death of the holder with no compensation to the estate
1996 Australia used it's list of registered semiauto hunting rifles to confiscate all those weapons.
The UK government instituted handgun registration in 1921, and about every 10 years or so they further restrict what can be owned and use the registration rolls to collect what is illegal.
How about Chicago, put in registration of long guns, used that same registration to confiscate semiauto long guns in the early 1990s
What about California, couldn't make up it's mind if the SKS was covered or not (1989), decided AFTER the registration period was closed that they needed to be registered, declared a second 'grace period' for registration...then about 5 years ago they decided that those SKSs registered during the grace period were illegal because the grace period was illegal, and in certain cities and counties sent law enforcement to the listed addresses demanding surrender of the firearm. Because there is the legal option of removing the gun from the state of CA, and these officers had no warrants, smart gun owners turned them away with the claim 'I gave it to a relative in Oregon (or whatever)' but MANY were seized with no compensation. (Cities and counties later on offered compensation for anyone who had a receipt, but the police weren't giving out receipts, only a few people who demanded them had them and they were basically notes scribbled on whatever spare paper the officer had)
Side Note, the SKS was the MOST common weapon in the hands of Korean Shop Owners who used them to defend themselves and businesses when the LA riots happened. -
The Korean shop owners should have defended their businesses by sending out strongly worded letters and waiting for the non-existent police presence to arrive.
The Korean shop owners should have defended their businesses by sending out strongly worded letters and waiting for the non-existent police presence to arrive.
I don't understand why so many people aren't getting this. Did the police stop or in many cases even try to defend the businesses in Ferguson or Balitimore?
You also had the riots in England a few years ago where thugs ran the streets for a few days terrorizing the citizens until police finally got the situation under control. But until the police got things under control you had citizens unable to defend themselves.
-
Chris - martial law was NEVER declared - that is a federal thing, and
the Gov wouldn't let the feds help. Refused to let the Red Cross help.
She declared a state of emergency, and did it all on her own, and it blew up
in her face.
-
And how different was it compared to the baltimore and ferguson riots? Where people were presumably armed and able to defend themselves? Not very is the answer.
-
What I read in Ferguson and Baltimore were business owners calling police and the police not responding to help. I did not read of any shop keepers standing armed at their stores like the LA riots where Korean business owners did and they saved their businesses from being looted and destroyed.
-
And 35 people were shot and killed in those riots, compared to about 3 in total over London, Baltimore and Ferguson, where shopkeepers weren't acting as vigilantes.
-
Mobs strip and rob people in third night of riots in London and across England
-
Mobs strip and rob people in third night of riots in London and across England
Mobs strip and rob people in third night of riots in London and across England
And let's ask those people if they'd rather be dead.
-
Mobs strip and rob people in third night of riots in London and across England
And let's ask those people if they'd rather be dead.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login