Mandatory Gun Buybacks

Status
Not open for further replies.
I think what Doc Rock and I were trying to be sure you understood (and with the above statement along with many past posts I am convinced you do) that those behind the 2A efforts have been at this for multiple generations, and will not relent until they either get what they want, which is 1984-like total control, or are eradicated. They have the lack of reason of the masses (deliberately induced by them) on their side. We only have truth and humanity on ours. They sense victory and have slipped control of overt enthusiasm of some of their 'useful dupes', hampered by the dumbing down which has infected their camp as well as the general population (AOC, Beto, et. al.) to the point where they are starting to lose control of their own machine.


In High School after I got my first "real" job, I joined the NRA with one of my first paychecks. That was in 1968....so believe me, I know how long this has been going on. I was one of those kids that drooled over those mail-order Mil-Surp guns in the back cover of F&S....and we know what happened there. I was watching T.V. when Kennedy got shot, when Oswald got shot and when Reagan/Brady got shot. I was there when there were anti-gun repercussions from all of them. I see no more "lack of reason" from most of those folks as I see from us. I see just as much "truth and humanity" on their side as I do on ours. How does one consider the true desire to save lives not humanity? Is it because we have been "dumbing down" our camps as well? Don't get me wrong, I am not endorsing or tryin' to justify any of the anti's arguments, but I do understand where they come from. I know that those folks do not all think of guns as an evil entity of their own. They are only thinking of easy access by those that are evil. As responsible gun owners, we too would like to see it harder for those types to get guns, the difference is how we see the solution. IMHO, One of the first things we need to do, is convince, anti's and those neutral, that the majority of us are responsible law abiding citizens and that more gun laws and restrictions, is just punishing us and not keeping firearms from those that are evil. That is an image we need to portray. Bullying, name calling and the suggestion of breaking laws(all of what I have seen posted on this forum) does nuttin' to perpetrate that image to others. Realistically tho, nuttin we do/say here is going to impact feelings/opinions of either side. Those who like guns are here and will agree, and those that don;t like guns will never see what we say here. Again, nuttin' but preaching to the choir. We need to get away from the keyboard and mentor some youths or take someone shooting that has never shot before. We need to get involved with anything in our community that involves the shooting sports. These are the things that will keep the chipping away......away.

Again, JMHO. Others are free to feel differently.
 
Agreed. Precisely why I was a 4-H Shooting Sports leader for ten years, and coach a HS Trap team currently.

I think we all know here that the "Soccer Mom" is not out to dominate the world, and not all anti- gun folks believe the gun itself is evil, (though there are some that do) but the point we all have to agree on is there are those behind the anti agenda whose goal is total control, and they are not above using others' emotions (and others' lives) in working towards their goal. And I agree, educating those whose stances on the issue isn't set in stone by example, and teaching the kids (the same method the anti's have been using for generations) and creating interest in the outdoors and responsible use of firearms in them.
 
Last edited:
Like so many other things, education is the key to enlightenment.

So many people are ignorant of how firearms work. Being fed sometimes ignorant, sometimes deliberate, misinformation by what passes for journalism today, they ascribe some kind of Black Magick, Witchcraft, Voodoo powers to them. Hollywood reinforces the image.

Guns turn ordinary people who wouldn't hurt a fly into murderous psychopaths. They "go off" by themselves. When shot, people are knocked off their feet and fly through the air in a shower of blood. The "seductive lure of the trigger" possess people like a demon and begs them to pull it.

Also, so many people have no understanding of the psychology of violence. Once again, the media misinforms and misleads. No one "just snaps" and kills a bunch of people. None of these horrific mass murders ever comes out of the blue. Once the initial headlines fade - once we do a little bit more digging - we find there is always more to the story; there is always a pattern of escalating behavior so predictable that the perpetrator might as well have been an actor following a script. And in a way, he was.

And so many people do not understand that laws only affect the law abiding.

You and I could own thousands of guns, millions of rounds of ammunition, 150 round drums, belt fed machine guns and pallets of linked ammo ready to go. And you know what we're gonna do with it all as well as I do. Bequeath it to our heirs.

The useful idiots don't understand that no one - criminal or law abiding - is going to do anything with 30 rounds he wouldn't do with one, wouldn't do anything with an AR15 he wouldn't do with a sporterized Mauser.
 
Suggesting that Communism is moribund when there is an entrenched Mandarin class inside the Beltway seeking to subvert the results of free and fair elections
*

* excerpted from a full post

"Mandarin class inside the Beltway" I like that a lot. In another vein, my pet peeve is the rabidly biased media feeding questions to their interviewee when they drop the bashing ball.
 
And the scripting of media coverage, particularly of Trump. What Lester Holt says it is the exact same as what Lisa Localanchor repeats half an hour later, and the exact thing Jimmy Fallon and Seth Meyers say after the 10:00 local news parrots what the 6:00 said. Fallon and Meyers just disguise it as a joke. (Meyers doesn't disguise it very well....)
 
Some thoughts:

I was reading this article which states that a recent Rasmussen poll shows 51% of Americans support a mandatory gun buyback:



So, if the response to a mandatory gun buyback is to buy more guns, either

1. The buyers expect to make money by reselling them back to the gov't, or
2. These people have zero intention of turning them in.






No to be too critical of your thread, but you should stop using the anti-gun terminology like 'buyback" or "reselling them back to the gov't". Unless someone has actually bought a surplus gun from the military, they were never owned by government. Guns are not produced nor owned by the government, yet liberal publications love to use the terms. Therefore the term buyback purposely implies the government granted ownership of their product, and now wants it back.

I don't know about anyone else, but I have never bought a gun from any local, state or federal gun agency. Therefore any gun I have ever owned was produce and sold to me by a private entity.

A better term to use would be coerced or mandatory confiscation of firearms. I say coerced because the odds of the "government" ever attempting a wholesale door to door confiscation is highly unlikely (as long as hundreds of millions of guns are in the possession of the citizens). However the threat of making a law abiding citizen into a felon if caught with a firearm, is the way most governments coerce people to comply with the confiscation.
 
No to be too critical of your thread, but you should stop using the anti-gun terminology like 'buyback" or "reselling them back to the gov't". Unless someone has actually bought a surplus gun from the military, they were never owned by government. Guns are not produced nor owned by the government, yet liberal publications love to use the terms. Therefore the term buyback purposely implies the government granted ownership of their product, and now wants it back.

I don't know about anyone else, but I have never bought a gun from any local, state or federal gun agency. Therefore any gun I have ever owned was produce and sold to me by a private entity.

A better term to use would be coerced or mandatory confiscation of firearms. I say coerced because the odds of the "government" ever attempting a wholesale door to door confiscation is highly unlikely (as long as hundreds of millions of guns are in the possession of the citizens). However the threat of making a law abiding citizen into a felon if caught with a firearm, is the way most governments coerce people to comply with the confiscation.
That's one of the things that always irritated me, this idea that the government can "buy back" something which they never owned. The other is the use of the term "resident" when the word "citizen" would be more appropriate. Citizens have rights, responsibilities and ultimately the ability to alter or abolish governments. Residents just happen to live somewhere...

One of the parts of the Alabama Constitution that I have always loved, and was always surprised that it was worded so bluntly, "Art. I, § 26. That every citizen has a right to bear arms in defense of himself and the state."
 
Last edited:
I wonder if Ms. Behar realizes how what she said sounds to many out here in the real world, as opposed to tv world. Is she sufficiently self aware enough to realize she is saying it's perfectly fine to lie to We, the People, in order to be elected, then to turn on We, the People and deprive of, through the force of law, our property?
I guess she doesn't...... I mean, obviously, what she said prompted the above headlines.

We know how tyranny happens .... how dictators like Hitker, Stalin, Lenin, Pol Pot, and Fidel Castro obtained power.
One reason; the Joy Behars of history,
 
The logistics of what she wishes are virtually impossible. OPSEC would be impossible. Just finding willing enforcement personnel would be hard, and again OPSEC there would be compromised big time. The first few attempts would be remembered as Concord Green II; you can dream all you want, Joy, and the response of many will be "MOLON LABE."
 
When it comes, there will be no kicking in doors. Those suspected of owning firearms will be ordered to turn them in. If they do not, they will be fined. Their wages will be garnished. Leans will be placed on their property. They will have driver's licenses taken away, be put on no-fly lists, etc., etc. It will be bureaucrats soullessly destroying lives with computer keys, not SWAT Teams doing no-knocks.

"But that will not get all firearms turned in!", you say. Of course not. Confiscation will never get all firearms. The goal is not a firearm-free nation. The goal is government monopoly over the means of force and coercion. Whether several thousand die-hards holed-up in the mountains have guns is irrelevant. When the vast and overwhelming majority of the population is without the means to offer violent resistance, when even those that have firearms are isolated and afraid to keep and bear them in a public manner, then the state will have an effective monopoly on violence. They don't need a gun-free populace; they need a populace that lives in fear.
 
Those suspected of owning firearms will be ordered to turn them in. If they do not, they will be fined.

Several Amendments will have to be repealed first. The 1st, 2nd, 4th, 5th, and 8th come to mind. Take away what a man has to live for and you've created a dangerous man.


Whether several thousand die-hards holed-up in the mountains have guns is irrelevant.

It won't be when they go on the offensive. Many of those will be people who have been exposed to asymmetric warfare, and know how to wage it. And they won't only be holed in in the mountains. They're from North California and South Alabam, and little towns all around this land.....and they don't do fear well.
 
Several Amendments will have to be repealed first. The 1st, 2nd, 4th, 5th, and 8th come to mind. Take away what a man has to live for and you've created a dangerous man.




It won't be when they go on the offensive. Many of those will be people who have been exposed to asymmetric warfare, and know how to wage it. And they won't only be holed in in the mountains. They're from North California and South Alabam, and little towns all around this land.....and they don't do fear well.

If they are confiscating firearms, you can safely assume that the Constitution is no longer a significant inconvenience to the state.

I would like to hope you are right about an armed resistance. I'm not optimistic.
 
Their wages will be garnished.
Considering the fact that my wife and I depend on our Social Security and Medicare, it would be a heck of a lot easier for a tyrannical government to confiscate my wife's and my firearms by stopping those two things than it would be for them to send a swat team to kick in our doors and take them - even though we're old, and in no kind of physical condition to put up much of an "armed resistance" type of fight.
I hope it never gets to that point.
Me too.
 
Considering the fact that my wife and I depend on our Social Security and Medicare, it would be a heck of a lot easier for a tyrannical government to confiscate my wife's and my firearms by stopping those two things than it would be for them to send a swat team to kick in our doors and take them - even though we're old, and in no kind of physical condition to put up much of an "armed resistance" type of fight.

Exactly. Kinda the point I've been trying to make. Altho some of the posts here are starting to sound like a Rambo or a John Wick movie, and you can almost hear the Fife and the Drum in the background, I doubt very much if it's going to down that way. In any apocalyptic/post-apocalyptic scenario(and odds are, that's what it will take for America to go down) or any Military Coup, while our guns may help us get a last piece of bread, we are probably going to have to kill our neighbor to get it, or kill him to keep it. Guns will be a small item compared to food, water and medical supplies. Our 9mm pistol with 5000 rounds of ammo will not feed our starving children or give them clean water to drink. That will be how we are defeated. Tyrants will not need take our guns.....only take our food and water. We can hide in the mountains, but anyone who can take over our country will burn those mountains or gas them, or blockade them until everyone there dies of thirst. Anyone that will take over our country will have all the technology available today to find us, and to blow us to Kingdom Come, with our "cold dead hands" still wrapped around our AR15s. If we are able to hide from the oppressors, how do we hide from the guy next to us, who is looking at that last pierce of bread? How do we sleep, knowing everyone around us will slit our throat for it? These TEOTWAWKI threads are entertaining, but not very realistic and in reality, have nuttin' to do with us keepin' our guns. The ones we need to be afraid of are the same ones we would have to fear in a apocalyptic/post-apocalyptic scenario. Those beside us, our neighbors. It's their vote that will take our guns away in the American society. Their votes, their opinions of us and our guns. Move to the mountains and stick your head in the sand and it's the millions in big cities, experiencing continuous random gun crimes, that will vote and help change the laws as we know it. Does anyone really think that presenting anything other than a positive image of guns and their owners is not going to matter?


The useful idiots don't understand that no one - criminal or law abiding - is going to do anything with 30 rounds he wouldn't do with one, wouldn't do anything with an AR15 he wouldn't do with a sporterized Mauser.

So.........I take it you only own single shot firearms and one box of ammo? Maybe I'm one of those "useful idiots", but IMHO, the above is the type of argument that makes us look foolish. Why is it so many all want high capacity and semi-automatic firearms for hunting and SD/HD? Just because we can? Maybe, but for the most part, it is because we know we are more lethal with such. Why is it LEOs have gone from revolvers with a capacity of 5 to semi-auto pistols with capacities of 15 or more? To keep up with the crooks who have the same. I'd like anyone here to convince me, that a BG, in the average school shooting scenario, can do just as much carnage with a Sporterized Mauser and one round, as he could with a AR15 with multiple high-capacity mags, in the 4 and 1/2 minutes it usually takes for the SWAT team to arrive. Anyone?

The argument is not that there's is no difference, but like the police, we as honest law abiding citizens, need to be on equal ground. The antis will claim that making such weapons illegal will stop that. But we need to convince them, that with the weapons already out there and the available Black Market, that restricting new sales is not lessening the threat, only increasing the risk to all of us. Look at the war on drugs, how many lives did that save as compared to lives lost because of illegal crime and big money to be made thru the black market? Not all anti's and those neutral are stupid. Many are as intelligent as we are or more so. That is why they laugh at us when we use those types of ridiculous and general statements. That is why those neutral also laugh at the antis that use such ridiculous and general statements. We should not lower ourselves to those tactics.
 
You completely misinterpreted what I wrote and turned it on its head.

My point is about the psychology of violence. How you and I are not going to go off and kill a bunch people no matter if we have actual machine guns or not. And how magazine capacity limits are not gonna stop murderous psychopaths from doing so.
 
Wow. Blockading mountains ... burning and gassing..... :what:

There's not enough of "them" to do all that. I suppose the Chinese Army is large enough .... maybe ....if they could all be transported here --- but they can't be.

They can try to take our food and water .... we can resist.
It's called "prepping."

I hate to think of this country devolving into a "MAD MAX" situation; it will be hell.
But irregular forces can be effective against a modern, mechanized force. If they're large enough, commited enough (which is a big question mark right there) to maintain the offensive and accept casualties without going soft.
The North Vietnamese fought an essentially low-tech war against American forces and drew the war on for years .... aided and abetted unwittingly by our own politicians of course, but eventually winning, essentially because of our own internal divisions.
We are pretty divided right now ..... and that fact may aid those who would resist the ....uh, "tyranny."

In the Korean War, our army was dumb enough to not be satisfied with simply pushing the North Koreans back north of the 38th parallel, they shoved the whole mess up to the Yalu River, the Chinese Border. Then the Chinese hordes came across ....our army arrived in mechanized columns....tanks, supply trucks, on roads. The Chinese came across on foot, carrying what arms they had on their persons, ignoring the roads. Our army watched blackclad columns of men marching south, encircling them.
And they were pushed back by the Chinese back across the 38th parallel, and fought bitterly for 2.5 years.
It cost the Chinese horribly .... but they did it.

Don't ever be so confident a modern army will inevitably prevail. George Armstrong Custer did that and oooooops, didn't work so well then.
Korea didn't work that great ....even the Taliban in A'Stan is still there .....
 
"Useful idiots " are the unwitting, ignorant masses who believe that gun bans, registration, magazine capacity limits, "universal background checks" are laws that somehow thugs who routinely ignore prohibitions on robbery, murder and rape are going to magically obey.

And just to forestall more misunderstanding:

"ignorance " is simply a lack of knowledge, not a value judgment upon one's intellectual abilities.
 
Why is it so many all want high capacity and semi-automatic firearms for hunting and SD/HD?

Here's one good reason; would you resign this pregnant woman and her family to the mercy (or lack thereof) of the home invaders? If anything, this should be a solid endorsement for AR's as home defense weapons.

https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...ome-intruders-with-ar15.858559/#post-11280651

The antis will claim that making such weapons illegal will stop that. But we need to convince them, that with the weapons already out there and the available Black Market, that restricting new sales is not lessening the threat, only increasing the risk to all of us.

And there you go, a shining example of that above. The problem we face is trying to convince those who's prefrontal cortex is shut off, due to social conditioning.The only way to do so is to sink to their (the masterminds behind it) level, convince people at the emotional level, at first.

Tyrants will not need take our guns.....only take our food and water.

Tyrants live in cities. Where does the food and water come from?

The last tyrant that did not live in a city was Gengis Khan; His son built a city, and lost his empire.

Yes, those behind the anti movement are intelligent. They also have been at it a long time, several generations, as I mentioned earlier. They are in it for the Long March, they are going for the big win. That big win will make 1984 look like one of the Scandinavian socialist paradises where they are taxed at 90% and the suicide rate is astronomical. They already have the ability to shut off .308 Norma's livelihood, (which would be a declaration of war on my person if done to me) do you really want them in a position to do that to everyone? If events such as the home invasion in the above link are what will jar some people to actually think about it, we must make sure the word gets out. That's one thing I liked about Oleg Volk's posters/memes. They can be very thought provoking. Using some of Saul Alinsky's Rules for Radicals against them may be the only way to avoid bloodshed in the future.
 
Last edited:
You completely misinterpreted what I wrote and turned it on its head.

My point is about the psychology of violence. How you and I are not going to go off and kill a bunch people no matter if we have actual machine guns or not. And how magazine capacity limits are not gonna stop murderous psychopaths from doing so.

Oh, I completely understand that part of it, but the statement you used(and I quoted) was generalized and ambiguous. I was only trying to point that out and how the normal person would comprehend what you stated. You have a valid argument, but that statement itself is not valid.


Wow. Blockading mountains ... burning and gassing..... :what:

There's not enough of "them" to do all that. I suppose the Chinese Army is large enough .... maybe ....if they could all be transported here --- but they can't be.

Don't take many of them with today's technology. Especially when there are no fortifications or a combined strategy. Especially when the combatants are generally, for the most part, old fat white guys with guns. :rofl::rofl::rofl:
Fun to dream and romanticize, but reality is what it is. Bringing up General Custer(who in himself was one of those useful idiots) and his failure because of his ego and ineptness, is a prime example of what folks might envision for themselves is not reality. The reality is Custer should have forgone his ego and stuck with the plan. Same goes for the Korean Conflict. Poor strategy and little knowledge of your enemy. Apparently we didn't learn from that before Vietnam. But all of that is drifting far from the topic of this thread, which is, Mandatory gun buybacks, which really has little or nuttin' to do with Korea, or the Little Big Horn. It has to do with the folks we and our neighbors elect and the ensuing laws they enact. Kinda the point I've been tryin' to make along.........o_O
 
I wonder if Ms. Behar realizes how what she said sounds to many out here in the real world, as opposed to tv world. Is she sufficiently self aware enough to realize she is saying it's perfectly fine to lie to We, the People, in order to be elected, then to turn on We, the People and deprive of, through the force of law, our property?
I guess she doesn't...... I mean, obviously, what she said prompted the above headlines.

We know how tyranny happens .... how dictators like Hitker, Stalin, Lenin, Pol Pot, and Fidel Castro obtained power.
One reason; the Joy Behars of history,

Well said my friend ...I hope your words are oft repeated.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top