When they come for your guns . . . You will turn them over

[CJ]

just saw this on the front of cnn

http://www.cnn.com/2012/11/14/opinion/webster-giffords-guns/index.html?hpt=hp_c3

Under federal law and most states' law, only individuals who attempt to purchase firearms from licensed gun dealers must present a government-issued ID, sign a form stating that they do not fit any of the firearm prohibition categories and pass a criminal background check. But criminals and gun traffickers are given an easy alternative. They can simply purchase firearms from private sellers who do not require any of these checks

Closing this absurd loophole would not be political suicide for politicians who fear losing the support of gun owners. A recent survey found that more than 80% of gun owners and 74% of NRA members want this loophole fixed. It seems likely that Giffords and Kelly, both gun owners, would be among this large majority favoring this reform.

Politicians could also strengthen our gun laws so that, for example, individuals convicted of misdemeanor crimes of violence (often pleaded down from felony charges) or those who have been convicted of multiple alcohol-related crimes are prohibited from possessing firearms. Studies have shown that these groups commit violent crimes at rates many times higher than population averages. Keeping guns from criminals and alcoholics isn't anti-gun -- it's pro-safety.

LOL 80% of gun owners want to ban face to face transfers? LOL at this bullshit.

[CJ]

I find it humorous how 99% of people who use the term "neo-cons" have no fucking idea what it means.

[dville_gt]

just saw this on the front of cnn

http://www.cnn.com/2012/11/14/opinion/webster-giffords-guns/index.html?hpt=hp_c3

Under federal law and most states' law, only individuals who attempt to purchase firearms from licensed gun dealers must present a government-issued ID, sign a form stating that they do not fit any of the firearm prohibition categories and pass a criminal background check. But criminals and gun traffickers are given an easy alternative. They can simply purchase firearms from private sellers who do not require any of these checks

Closing this absurd loophole would not be political suicide for politicians who fear losing the support of gun owners. A recent survey found that more than 80% of gun owners and 74% of NRA members want this loophole fixed. It seems likely that Giffords and Kelly, both gun owners, would be among this large majority favoring this reform.

Politicians could also strengthen our gun laws so that, for example, individuals convicted of misdemeanor crimes of violence (often pleaded down from felony charges) or those who have been convicted of multiple alcohol-related crimes are prohibited from possessing firearms. Studies have shown that these groups commit violent crimes at rates many times higher than population averages. Keeping guns from criminals and alcoholics isn't anti-gun -- it's pro-safety.

[91cavgt]

The military will never come door to door taking your guns. The government knows it would be a death sentence for them. Instead, most of the population will come to them, begging for help. Something is going to happen which will shut down the infrastructure and so there will be no electricity, running water, gas at the gas stations, or food at the grocery stores. When people get hungry enough, they will gladly go to the FEMA refugee camps that have power, food, and running water, but you will not be allowed to bring weapons in "In order to maintain law and order". After this, then the military will be called in to do door to door searches to remove weapons from abandoned houses in an attempt to keep weapons out of the hands of "roaming gangs". At this time, the military will gladly disarm citizens. The propaganda will be told to the military that in order to protect your family, these gangs MUST be disarmed. The military will be told that all freedom loving Americans have already been transferred to FEMA camps, and all that remains are those that wish to do harm to America and to their families.


It's not going to happen overnight, but if and/or when it does happen this is how they will do it.

[Moose242]

france has been like that for centuries, i have a hard time drawing similarties between the french and an americans. if you really are going to live in australia i'd suggest looking at the tax rates, they're worse and it's considered a worse welfare state (albeit a smaller population).

http://www.ato.gov.au/individuals/co...tent/12333.htm

Their HDI is higher-

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Development_Index

As is their economic freedom-

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Index_of_Economic_Freedom

[dville_gt]

not saying that you would or wouldn't but from what i have seen you post it's like you have already given up

first of all, i didn't write the article. obviously i agree with it for the most part, but i haven't "given up". calling a spade a spade does not indicate i'm happy about it or that it is what i would do.

second, it might be to our advantage to realize that we are not some type of finely tuned, well organized group that would band together and easily overtake the powers that be. at least if everyone has a realistic expectation of how other will or might act it could lend itself advantageous for those who actually will fight back. they won't come out tomorrow and say turn in your guns or else, they will slowly villainize guns and erode gun rights. they will do it in a way that not everyone is affected, so most folks will be "okay" with it since it doesn't pertain to them directly, then eventually once they've got everyone fairly conditioned to the idea of limiting gun ownership, and they've disarmed a % of the population, then i could see them moving in for the rest. at that point the % of the population that could or would be willing to fight back would be lowered to a more manageable number. this is why i think being open to the idea that we could very possibly not be able to fight back at some point highlights the importance of preventing the gov from continually chipping away at our civil liberties (both related to and not related to gun ownership)

[32valves_of_pleasure]

I have. I believe that the middle class, which is already diminishing at an astonishing rate, will result in a society so polarized (as far as haves and have nots) that we will resemble a place like Mexico. A war on the haves will be declared just like it had in France, and the people who produce, invest, and cultivate the country's economics are fed the fuck up-

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/313410/les-riches-are-thinking-leaving-france-and-recession-moving-veronique-de-rugy

http://caps.fool.com/Blogs/300000-french-expected-to/746790

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-19626188

Are they to be called cowards for fleeing to protect their assets?

france has been like that for centuries, i have a hard time drawing similarties between the french and an americans. if you really are going to live in australia i'd suggest looking at the tax rates, they're worse and it's considered a worse welfare state (albeit a smaller population).

http://www.ato.gov.au/individuals/content.aspx?doc=/content/12333.htm

[Moose242]

very different circumstances for all those countries, most of which revolved around civil war or genocide.

The Rhodies (with foresight) bailed the second they saw the rise in strife. Those that made it abroad early on were wise to do so.

[32valves_of_pleasure]

I know plenty of Rhodesians who are glad to have escaped to other places when their country started going to shit. Same goes for the Vietnamese, Cambodians, Iranians, massive populations of Jews, etc.

Sometimes jumping ship is your best option.

very different circumstances for all those countries, most of which revolved around civil war or genocide.

[Moose242]

not saying that you would or wouldn't but from what i have seen you post it's like you have already given up

I have. I believe that the middle class, which is already diminishing at an astonishing rate, will result in a society so polarized (as far as haves and have nots) that we will resemble a place like Mexico. A war on the haves will be declared just like it had in France, and the people who produce, invest, and cultivate the country's economics are fed the fuck up-

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/313410/les-riches-are-thinking-leaving-france-and-recession-moving-veronique-de-rugy

http://caps.fool.com/Blogs/300000-french-expected-to/746790

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-19626188

Are they to be called cowards for fleeing to protect their assets?

[grove rat]

Sometimes jumping ship is your best option.

every definition of jumping ship i know of is basically quitting and abandoning your post/crew to save yourself. it really is a good thing you didn't join the military, you'd be the first person jumping ship when things got rough


let us know how those kangaroos are. seriously.

[32valves_of_pleasure]

man, that is a hell of a sample if i've ever seen one.

out of all of the people i know right now, i can't think of one that is currently has cancer. must mean cancer has been cured!



some estimates put the number of people on federal aid at 49%, ironically the same % of people who pay no tax. granted most of those folks dont rely on the gov for EVERYTHING, but a lot of those folks would be swayed by the notion of losing whatever support they are receiving.

and to me, if even 5% of the country could not sustain their life's with out the government, that is a HUGE %

you make fun of another persons anecdote and then go on to quote a rush limbaugh sourced graph? makes sense, tells us more.

[SS Junk]

Dear God in Heaven. A GRAPH!!!

[grove rat]

sorry but i believe that most americans(even the ones who voted for the current potus) will do what's right when the time comes and not roll over or jump ship. sure there will be plenty of them(dohctr) but there will be plenty of those who will not. i will be part of those who will not. i don't care if it's me and one other crazy idiot or millions. if you are okay with just giving up it speaks a lot about your character

not saying that you would or wouldn't but from what i have seen you post it's like you have already given up

[Moose242]

and even some of these folks would flee the country (dohctr)

I know plenty of Rhodesians who are glad to have escaped to other places when their country started going to shit. Same goes for the Vietnamese, Cambodians, Iranians, massive populations of Jews, etc.

Sometimes jumping ship is your best option.