good AP article pointing out Robert Francis' flawed thinking

[AlexanderA]

I don’t think the majority of owners will do that. I hope I’m wrong but I think most people are talk and just like the kiwis will go turn them in.

There will be massive noncompliance but it will be quiet. Guns will just disappear into the woodwork. Unlike in New Zealand, the government doesn't know where the guns are.

The problem for the antis is that Beto jumped the gun. They needed to have their registration plan in place before announcing confiscations.

If there is mandatory NFA registration now (see Chipman's suggestion, above) only a nominal portion of the extant guns will be registered (to gain whatever advantages are offered) while the rest go underground.

 

[RETG]

Beto...."common sense" says he has absolutely NO chance of becoming president and now he probably has no chance of going back to TX and run for senator again. (Love using the "common sense) phrase in this post.)

So why even discuss what he says?

 

[SilentStalker]

There will be massive noncompliance but it will be quiet. Guns will just disappear into the woodwork. Unlike in New Zealand, the government doesn't know where the guns are.

The problem for the antis is that Beto jumped the gun. They needed to have their registration plan in place before announcing confiscations.

If there is mandatory NFA registration now (see Chipman's suggestion, above) only a nominal portion of the extant guns will be registered (to gain whatever advantages are offered) while the rest go underground.

That’s the dumbest thing people could possibly do. I don’t know about you all but I use my tools. I don’t just get them out to fondle them and put them back up. A tool that has to stay hidden away and cannot be used is not a tool. That would make the ban or the law pretty much 100% effective.

The only real way to fight this is to have states counter it and have their LE and national guard onboard with standing up to this nonsense. If nobody in the state enforces it and the guard is there to protect states rights then you are golden. If not, then you got problems. The gov couldn’t literally force everyone to comply by making your life hell. I’ve already listed some examples but am not going to list anymore as all that does is give them more ideas. To be honest it really doesn’t matter what the hell they pass as it won’t be Constitutional until they go through the proper steps. The problem is even those unconstitutional laws are basically upheld and in place until it’s settled in the courts. That could take years or more. Look at the bumpstock ban.

 

[SilentStalker]

"Chipman believes an assault weapon ban should be handled similar to the machine gun rules, requiring they be registered and heavily regulated but not confiscated."

Would this be worth discussing if:
1. The Hughes Amendment was repealed,
2. There was a set-in-stone deadline of one month for Form 4 approvals, and
3. There was an ironclad commitment by the antis that confiscation was permanently off the table?

No, because none of that would ever happen!

 

[Pudge]

"Chipman believes an assault weapon ban should be handled similar to the machine gun rules, requiring they be registered and heavily regulated but not confiscated."

Would this be worth discussing if:
1. The Hughes Amendment was repealed,
2. There was a set-in-stone deadline of one month for Form 4 approvals, and
3. There was an ironclad commitment by the antis that confiscation was permanently off the table?

Ironclad like putting something in the Constitution?

 

[stillquietvoice]

Chipman believes an assault weapon ban should be handled similar to the machine gun rules, requiring they be registered and heavily regulated but not confiscated."

Problem is that NY is one of those states that doesn't allow full auto nra items and Cuomo would get them on that basis alone. If it were it to come to that the militia in me would act against governmental tyrany.

I'll turn my AR into a real weapon of war. Might make the anti's happy.

People have had the tools for mass shootings for a very long time, yet have not done so until recently. The problem is not with the guns.

Iirc most mass shootings with AR or AK rifles didn't start until early 90's right after California held its first rally to ban those rifles because of their use in crime. They searched for all confiscated firearms and couldn't find any. They rented what they needed from the nra museum to hold their rally. Then a couple weeks later there was a school yard shooting with an AK.

 

[AlexanderA]

Ironclad like putting something in the Constitution?

Exactly. If the antis are sincere about any further regulation of guns, they would have to agree to a constitutional amendment expanding and clarifying the 2nd, and explicitly outlawing confiscations. Call their bluff about "common sense" gun laws! Beto's outburst has suddenly made our bargaining position much stronger.

 

[AlexanderA]

So why even discuss what he says?

Because he has undermined the antigunners' arguments. We need to take advantage of that.

 

[AlexanderA]

That’s the dumbest thing people could possibly do. I don’t know about you all but I use my tools. I don’t just get them out to fondle them and put them back up. A tool that has to stay hidden away and cannot be used is not a tool. That would make the ban or the law pretty much 100% effective.

The known presence of hidden weapons is, in itself, incredibly powerful. They don't have to be used, or even shown openly, to have an effect. In WW2 occupied Europe, the Nazis were so worried about hidden weapons in the hands of civilians that they made the penalty for being found with one instant death. That didn't stop their men from being ambushed. They had to divert thousands of troops from the front to keep their occupied areas under control.

Here's what happened when the Greek Resistance was ordered to give up its weapons in February 1945, before the war was even over:



These men were upset, to say the least. (Quite a few of them actually kept their weapons.)

 

[CapnMac]

Well, initial reports out of NZ are giving widely varying numbers, government claiming nearly 40% but "un-named government sources" reporting 20-25%
Or, approximately the same compliance CT has for their ban. (MA may be up to all of 15%, NY is, perhap, 10%, after heavilty rounding up.)
The Australians are "confident" that they got 2/3 of the "known" arms turned in. How accurate the "known" figure was is subject to significant debate. And, by all reports there are more (legal) firearms in Australia than before the ban. Criminal elements continue to ignore the Australian law and are frequently found with illegal arm, and fully automatic weapons.

 

[berettaprofessor]

Beto's outburst has suddenly made our bargaining position much stronger.

No! There is no bargaining position. Ever. The “other” side can’t be trusted. Bargaining is loss. Every time something is given up, it never comes back.

 

[SilentStalker]

The known presence of hidden weapons is, in itself, incredibly powerful. They don't have to be used, or even shown openly, to have an effect. In WW2 occupied Europe, the Nazis were so worried about hidden weapons in the hands of civilians that they made the penalty for being found with one instant death. That didn't stop their men from being ambushed. They had to divert thousands of troops from the front to keep their occupied areas under control.

Here's what happened when the Greek Resistance was ordered to give up its weapons in February 1945, before the war was even over:



These men were upset, to say the least. (Quite a few of them actually kept their weapons.)

You realize that there is more illegal guns in Germany than legal ones by a huge margin. The police will even admit it. Check it out. The problem is, they are buried somewhere and people cannot use them. The gov knows there are tons out there yet that hasn’t stopped them from doing anything politically that they want to do...just saying. This whole logic about having crap hidden away being a deterrent baffles me. If I have to play hideaway then the time to use it has long passed. I’d rather it not ever get to that point.

 

[BigBore44]

3. There was an ironclad commitment by the antis that confiscation was permanently off the table?

There is no such thing as an ironclad commitment by any politician. Why is that so hard for you to see and understand? The Constitution is the best ironclad commitment to protect our rights. It was written by men who believed their word was their bond. And you cannot deny that even that has been being eroded away.

Look at the flip flopping on both sides of the political front. And you actually trust these people to stand by what they say? Bargain your rights away if you want. Don’t bargain mine. Ironclad means nothing when a new administration and new congress gains power. It means nothing when a new administration puts in new Supreme Court justices. Surely you’re not that naive.

 

[Shanghai McCoy]

Long enough ago that it was relevant, a cop pointed to the 55 mph national speed limit as an example of how the general public "obeys" laws it dislikes.

And the enforcement of that speed limit became a huge "cash cow" for state and local law enforcement.
And I also remember the proliferation of radar detectors and cb radios to "counter" the speed traps...

 

[Kendahl]

I also remember the proliferation of radar detectors and cb radios to "counter" the speed traps.

I had both. In the late 1970s, I spent $400, when it was real money, on a first generation Escort detector. In terms of ROI, it was the most profitable "investment" I ever made. (For the most part, I drove speeds that were legal pre-55 and are legal again.)

 

[AlexanderA]

Speaking of "ironclad" guarantees, I realize that nothing is "ironclad." But there are several factors at work here.

The first is timing. If we can delay the inevitable for 10 or 20 years, there's a good chance the whole debate may change in that time.

Secondly, there's political appearance. If the antis openly commit not to confiscate, they will lose support if they go back on their word. That public support is critical.

Thirdly, the constitutional amendment process. The antis would have to agree to support a new constitutional amendment that would expand and clarify the existing 2nd Amendment. Thus, if both sides supported this, there's a good chance it would be passed and ratified. Thereafter, it would be very difficult to undo.

OK, there's not much chance that we would find agreement from the other side. But put a plan out there and let them squirm. We are dealing with multidimensional chess.

 

[old lady new shooter]

I don’t think the majority of owners will do that. I hope I’m wrong but I think most people are talk and just like the kiwis will go turn them in. The gov will make things very hard on those that don’t. They can easily call in the IRS and garnish wages, add other fees and penalties, deny loans, freeze assets and all sorts of crap to get you to comply. And most people like their families, their TVs, their food and so on.

I just went googling to see what percentage of guns were actually turned in in New Zealand, first page of results didn't say, but I did learn that Australia has more privately owned guns now than when they made their buyback in 1996. Plus, neither of those countries had anything like our Second Amendment.

 

[old lady new shooter]

Problem is that NY is one of those states that doesn't allow full auto nra items and Cuomo would get them on that basis alone.

Yesterday at the indoor range where I shoot, there was a guy a couple of lanes over shooting a full auto. I love Arizona. (In case you're wondering, they have different rooms to which they assign the patrons, depending on what they are shooting that day. I was in what I call the loud room, because I was shooting an AR pistol.)

Iirc most mass shootings with AR or AK rifles didn't start until early 90's right after California held its first rally to ban those rifles because of their use in crime. They searched for all confiscated firearms and couldn't find any. They rented what they needed from the nra museum to hold their rally. Then a couple weeks later there was a school yard shooting with an AK.

I would love to have more information on that, do you have a link by any chance?

 

[old lady new shooter]

The known presence of hidden weapons is, in itself, incredibly powerful. They don't have to be used, or even shown openly, to have an effect. In WW2 occupied Europe, the Nazis were so worried about hidden weapons in the hands of civilians that they made the penalty for being found with one instant death. That didn't stop their men from being ambushed. They had to divert thousands of troops from the front to keep their occupied areas under control.

Here's what happened when the Greek Resistance was ordered to give up its weapons in February 1945, before the war was even over:



These men were upset, to say the least. (Quite a few of them actually kept their weapons.)

I see all these grown men crying and throwing their weapons on the pile, not what I was expecting.

Greek is not one of my languages, can you tell us what the text says?

 

[old lady new shooter]

3. There was an ironclad commitment by the antis that confiscation was permanently off the table?

"If you like your plan, you can keep your plan."

There is no such thing as an ironclad commitment by these people.

Besides which, what if OTHER people attain power? Look what happened with the Weimar Republic.

 

[SilentStalker]

I just went googling to see what percentage of guns were actually turned in in New Zealand, first page of results didn't say, but I did learn that Australia has more privately owned guns now than when they made their buyback in 1996. Plus, neither of those countries had anything like our Second Amendment.

Yes, but after what hoops and what kinds of weapons?

 

[BlueHeelerFl]

It's like trying to figure out what the mid-1790's French revolutionaries wanted... it depends on the day. So far, at least, the guillotining has been confined to social media and employment in this reboot of the revolution.

I'm sure there's guillotining in the works if they ever manage to take guns away.

 

[LiveLife]

neither of those countries had anything like our Second Amendment.

Australia and New Zealand were royal subjects at the mercy of the crown but we are not. Kinda like chained/leashed dogs vs free roaming dogs.

Unlike Australia/New Zealand, our founders declared independence from Great Britain and formed a new constitutional republic form of government with people to have right to keep and bear arms.

That's why Australia/New Zealand gun ban/confiscation won't apply as same for USA as there will be legal challenges as we already have our court wins that forced state/federal governments to undo unconstitutional laws.

 

[AlexanderA]

I see all these grown men crying and throwing their weapons on the pile, not what I was expecting.

Greek is not one of my languages, can you tell us what the text says?

There's actually very little text in the video.

A little background: The Germans evacuated most of Greece in October 1944 (they left a few scattered garrisons behind, chiefly on Crete). The Greek Resistance quickly took over most of the areas that the Germans evacuated, but the British and the Greek government-in-exile managed to establish themselves in central Athens, the port, the airport, and a few other enclaves. This led to clashes, because the Resistance did not want the return of the exiled king and the rehabilitation of collaborationists. In early February 1945, the Yalta Conference was held among Churchill, Roosevelt, and Stalin. Under the terms of the Yalta agreement, the British were allocated a 90% sphere of influence in Greece. Immediately following Yalta, the local parties in Greece -- under pressure from the Allied Powers -- entered into a truce (the Varkiza Agreement) under which the Resistance would be demobilized and disarmed. Those that refused to comply organized themselves secretly and this led to the second round of the Greek Civil War from 1946-1949. (The scene in the video is members of the Resistance surrendering their weapons pursuant to the Varkiza Agreement.)

 

[BlueHeelerFl]

Secondly, there's political appearance. If the antis openly commit not to confiscate, they will lose support if they go back on their word. That public support is critical

But that side is the party of "evolving" positions. They can be against something publicly for their entire career, and then take the totally opposite position and be hailed as a hero for doing so