If Hillary get elected how long will it be until gun confiscation?

[namedpipes]

It's different because you're basically prodding the guy at the bar going "Get drunk and belligerent so I can hit you". You're pushing for a fight that isn't going to happen anytime soon, if ever.

The problem is you're showing them that their course of action is right in their mind, because you look dangerous and need to be stopped.

What you don't get is that the drunkard is already on the attack, it just doesn't look that way.

I guarantee you, that I can immobilize you with tissue paper. It might take a lot of it, but wrapping you with enough Scott Tissue will eventually make you unable to move. Will eventually suffocate you and you will die. From something we use to wipe our noses.

That's exactly what is happening. More successfully in states like MA, CA and NJ, but increasingly, everywhere. It's happening at the Federal level with our current president and Cankles promises more. It's happening at the state level - witness NY and CT recently. It's happening at the local level - witness the shooting range "war" going on in West Boyleston.

Give it another two or three hundred years. It might be legal to own a gun but it will be effectively impossible to get ammo for it or to carry it in any meaningful manner. There will simply be too many laws to comply with.

The death of a thousand cuts. That's why I said earlier that they will win. They will. Be it next year, maybe in 50 or even 200 years, but they will win. And then there will absolutely be bloodshed, no matter how frigging civilized you think you're being. You're just being shortsighted. You're being duped.

 

[Periphery]

What you don't get is that the drunkard is already on the attack, it just doesn't look that way.

I guarantee you, that I can immobilize you with tissue paper. It might take a lot of it, but wrapping you with enough Scott Tissue will eventually make you unable to move. Will eventually suffocate you and you will die. From something we use to wipe our noses.

That's exactly what is happening. More successfully in states like MA, CA and NJ, but increasingly, everywhere. It's happening at the Federal level with our current president and Cankles promises more. It's happening at the state level - witness NY and CT recently. It's happening at the local level - witness the shooting range "war" going on in West Boyleston.

Give it another two or three hundred years. It might be legal to own a gun but it will be effectively impossible to get ammo for it or to carry it in any meaningful manner. There will simply be too many laws to comply with.

The death of a thousand cuts. That's why I said earlier that they will win. They will. Be it next year, maybe in 50 or even 200 years, but they will win. And then there will absolutely be bloodshed, no matter how frigging civilized you think you're being. You're just being shortsighted. You're being duped.

Perhaps but if the drunk goads you into hitting him first, you'll be at fault. It's exactly what they want. If we lose our cool we prove their point, and you're being duped if you fall for it.

 

[namedpipes]

Perhaps but if the drunk goads you into hitting him first, you'll be at fault. It's exactly what they want. If we lose our cool we prove their point, and you're being duped if you fall for it.

Who is talking about hitting? That was somebody's euphemism for the fight at hand. We're fighting each and every day using organizations like GOAL and Comm2A here in MA and nationally with NRA and some others. NY and CT gun owners had the opportunity to send a clear FU to their states by refusing to comply with profoundly unconstitutional laws. I guess that simply showed the Brady Bunch that we're a bunch of scofflaws that should be hunted down and sent to gulag.

 

[Terminator03]

There won't be any civil war type of action necessary. All that they need to do is tie in your family health insurance, car reg. and insurance, driver's license, etc., or any of a hundred other nooses the state and federal government has around our necks. Sure there are states where records are virtually non-existent, but at least 2/3 of this country has some form of documentation surrounding either firearm transfer, carry licensing, or both, so it doesn't take a real sophisticated system to track down suspected gun owners, and make the reinstatement of their insurance, license, or whatever contingent upon registering their firearms, or turning them in. There will be a huge number that sticks up their middle fingers, I'm sure, but then there comes the situation where you may have guns but can no longer shoot them, or practice with them because as soon as you leave your house to go to the range or someplace else, you risk getting caught with the contraband. After a generation or so of indoctrination in the school systems and colleges as we are already witnessing, the guns will all but disappear since the next generation, or the one after won't have any use for the risk of owning those guns. As others have said, it will be a slow, but ever steady progression with no shots fired.

 

[browncoat]

This! +1

A lot of people don't realize this.

A lot of people who stayed home and didn't vote for McCain or Romney caused us to get not only Obama for 8 years, but 2 Supreme Court nominees. This further endangers not only our gun rights, but filters into all sorts of laws across the board.

So, hopefully, no matter who the republican nominee is, everyone will turn out. We cannot afford another democrat.

The problem is that the same thing could be true of the republican candidate if, say, Bush gets the nod. I would feel comfortable with Rand Paul picking justices, and that's about it. Other candidates don't care enough about all of the rights

 

[warwickben]

If people want to know why we have the 2a. Tell them to watch winter on fire on Netflix.

 

[Horrible]

The problem is that the same thing could be true of the republican candidate if, say, Bush gets the nod. I would feel comfortable with Rand Paul picking justices, and that's about it. Other candidates don't care enough about all of the rights

All you need to do to confirm what you are saying is look at Jeb's big bro's picks (Roberts?). No friends of liberty by any stretch.

 

[Varmint]

The problem is that the same thing could be true of the republican candidate if, say, Bush gets the nod. I would feel comfortable with Rand Paul picking justices, and that's about it. Other candidates don't care enough about all of the rights

It's not really Bush's fault, picking justices is nothing like picking political candidates, they aren't supposed to be political, so it's tougher to determine how they'd vote.

 

[mac1911]

Gun confiscation in the US is not going to happen. You guys keep bringing this up over and over again. People who own guns know their rights and know the signs of their rights being taken away from them like in when that happened in Nazi Germany, Communist Russia, Red China...etc....it WON"T happen here. 300 million guns in the hands of that many Americans make us the largest standing army on the continent. Good luck taking away our firearms

taking our guns might not happen but they sure can **** with any supplies
.GOV owns the land and equipment to the only powder manufacturing facilities in the US. ATK currently leases one of them.
Wouldn't take much for GOV to ban import of smokeless powder, primers,bullets and such. Cut off the mail order and we are in big trouble. So yes they could not effectively collect all our guns but they could with ease make it very very hard to even buy ammo or the needed supplies.

 

[Mountain]

Agreed that gov can F with supplies- won't be difficult for them to do and it will happen before we realize it's done.

For those hoping it comes to forced confiscation which thus initiates 'go time!', just my dumb opinion but the reality will be much less exciting but infinitely more frustrating. What I think team Hildabeast will try to do will be much more strategic. There will be a series of end-runs with a result that will make it increasingly difficult and expensive to manufacture, distribute, sell, insure, buy/own, re-supply, and even use firearms. With a donor list that reads like a who's who of bank, finance, credit, and insurance companies, her influence could squeeze 2A rights from all the angles such companies would leverage. Stacking the supreme court could render all sorts of seemingly unfair decisions- such as increasing the umbrella of liability and magnitude of penalties for any gun related crime.

She's bad news, but not stupid. I think many of her biggest blunders were born out of arrogance, not simple stupidity. I think she will be much more dangerous than America's most successful gun salesman ever (ObaMao).

 

[Dadstoys]

You're just playing into their hands because you sound like you genuinely want violence.

If your of the mindset that you can talk or reason your way out of any situation, then I have some vacation property in Afghanistan to sell you.
I'm sure they'll love you.

Always try reason first, failing that if your not ready to do what needs to be done then get out the knee pads and jaw oil, your going to need them.
There are people in the world who fall under the Terminator rules.
They can't be reasoned with.
They can't be bargained with
They feel no pity or remorse.
And they will not stop coming, ever.

 

[weehooker]

Not in my lifetime anyway. I don't know of one LE/ Military member that would be willing to go door to door to fight law abiding citizens for this purpose. That said, Hilary is not as dumb as she looks. She will continue to eat the gun control elephant one bite at a time. Some bites will be bigger than others. The end game though, is to wear down the public and erode gun owner numbers over time.

 

[sieveboy]

Gun confiscation in the US is not going to happen. You guys keep bringing this up over and over again. People who own guns know their rights and know the signs of their rights being taken away from them like in when that happened in Nazi Germany, Communist Russia, Red China...etc....it WON"T happen here. 300 million guns in the hands of that many Americans make us the largest standing army on the continent. Good luck taking away our firearms

But they could easily stick us with guns that we can't leave the house with, and cannot transfer, as they have done in New York and Connecticut. Plenty of people with ARs in these states who don't dare take them to the range to shoot.

 

[FreeWillie]

Can they confiscate guns that have a cold paperwork trail? How many like that do you think are out there? Millions? (Don't confess). Jack.

You have no idea. my friend.

 

[jpm]

I have to laugh at the notion that you're going to hold off the military if they want to come take your guns. They could drone you into oblivion before you know what happened and all those green tips you stocked up on for just such an occasion would be scattered around the remnants of your 'bunker'. They aren't stupid, they know what attempted confiscation would involve and they won't be polite about it if they do come which is why it would likely never happen.

 

[enbloc]

If you let them take your guns... you didn't deserve to have them.

 

[FreeWillie]

It's different because you're basically prodding the guy at the bar going "Get drunk and belligerent so I can hit you". You're pushing for a fight that isn't going to happen anytime soon, if ever.

The problem is you're showing them that their course of action is right in their mind, because you look dangerous and need to be stopped.

You might be more comfortable over at DailyKos. You need to check and make sure you still have all your man parts boy.

Hey Frenchman, I got your six. Let's get it.

 

[Waher]

Confiscation will be done slowly through regulatory strangulation, de jure bans, and taxation. The slow march through the institution like the Frankfurters did to destroy the media, art, and higher ed, civil society, and what they are slowly doing to the armed forces.

If any of the antis were dumb enough to go full militarized confiscation several state governments and enforcement agencies would tell them to go screw. The eventual Waco style fiasco would lead to a trickle of resistance followed by a flood and it would get really ugly.

As far as drones, that isn't working so great or effectively with the Taliban. Do you think it would go over so well with Americans in their own country?

 

[GlockJock]

If they're gonna try to take away guns, just try it. Try to take em away...all those nasty, icky guns that the Anti's want to eradicate. And then we'll just buy all our sh*t on the street or from "friends" and still carry - illegally. Just like during prohibition. That 18th amendment really worked well back then eh?... Immediately, upon being ratified and enacted into law, all of that nasty, icky alcohol that the Anti's wanted to eradicate simply disappeared, immediately, as if Bewitched had wiggled her nose or Jeannie blinked, and immediately all consumption of the devil's brew ceased and desisted. Period. Nobody had even one sip of booze between the years 1920-1933. Life was great, everyone was "saved", and there was no violence over the issue of booze. Nobody in the USA sold booze. Nobody made any money from the sale or consumption of it. Success was here at last for the Anti's!!!

Screw it. Ban em. It'll be friggin easier anyways, given the ridiculous hoops and onerous bullsh*t you have to deal with to buy a gun in MA anyways (if you even CAN buy that one particular gun you like since it might not be on the phantom "approved" list down here). One of these days we should do a challenge/race thing where one NES member meets me at, say, Kelly's on Route 1 in Saugus. You set off to buy a legal gun at a legal gun shop maybe 3 miles away. I set off in a different direction, 3 miles away. You know where the gun shops are. And me? I "know a guy". And I guarantee - virtually guarantee - and I would indeed bet literally any amount that I will return to our meeting spot, then go BACK to my "guy" and get another. And maybe even do it AGAIN, all before you've waited in line and completed the paperwork and registration bullsh*t at the legal gun shop. I'll have three in my possession to your one - and yours is actually one you really didn't want but Maura said "stop that!!" when you tried to buy what you really wanted......What's that you say? "Jail"??...A "stiff sentence"??....HA!! LMFAO!! This is Massachusetts!! Nobody goes to jail and even if I do, I'll be out in no time flat...Best of all, I'm a convicted felon. Now I'll qualify for MassHealth, EBT, etc etc

Oh, and you paid sales tax too.....

 

[Realtor MA]

CNC Machines = one of the reasons gun control will never work

 

[peterthefish]

CNC Machines = one of the reasons gun control will never work

Powder and primers, on the other hand... They might not be able to stop folks from making guns but clamping down on components that aren't easily manufactured...

 

[kalash]

CNC Machines = one of the reasons gun control will never work

That won't matter since there will be no actual forced confiscation. The noose will tighten around everything, whether factory-made or basement-made.

 

[just jim]

Really can't believe everyone has forgotten what the Clintons did last time they were in office. I could go on for hours but remember this gal?

http://directorblue.blogspot.com/2008/09/jamie-gorelick-mistress-of-disaster.html?m=1

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jamie_Gorelick

 

[drgrant]

Agree, but whether it'll (confiscation) actually happen nationwide or not, they'll keep f*ckin trying and keep coming back like the cockroaches do if you flood their nest with Raid or poison... They just keep f*ckin coming.

I'm not worried about confiscation, it's unrealistic. What is realistic is antis trying to destroy gun culture. Like Knuckle Dragger says, this is a marathon, not a sprint. The most dangerous thing for us is not faggot politicians doing stupid shit, it's a deterioration of gun culture in a bunch of different ways. For example antis want to do shit like shut down ranges, etc. We've kicked them in the junk pretty hard but they are going to keep going for stupid shit like annoying regulations here there and everywhere, etc. It's the "kid getting suspended for bringing a glock pen to school" or "gun range closed because of imaginary safety concerns" type of shit that is the real problem going forward.

This "confiscation with black vans coming out" tinfoiler shit is typically stupid. That's not likely absent some kind of regional large scale disaster, etc. (eg like what happened with Katrina). It's the small shit you really have to worry about.... that's what turns into cancer in the long run. Getting more people to get guns and give a shit about keeping them is more important than any head on political battle... because one hand washes the other- you get a critical mass of people who care about gun rights, and suddenly it becomes politically problematic. It already is that way in some circles, but we need to make gun control a political loser of an issue 110% of the time, something like what happened with prohibition.

-Mike

 

[drgrant]

Depends on how one defines "confiscation". I agree that a nationwide forced collection of guns is highly unlikely any time soon, but I can see something along the line of the Aussie/GB model happening in the not-so-super-distant future. All it takes is the right "tragedy" resulting in some kind of a ban being enacted w/o grandfather clauses accompanied by a "mandatory buyback". Anti's will argue a buyback is not confiscation, but logically a mandatory buyback is. It may not start at the national level, but with a highly sympathetic/encouraging federal executive branch, I can see some cities and/or states trying to start the ball rolling locally. I could see them starting with the CT approach, register or be a felon. It's not happening Feb 1st 2017, but there are enough anti's that play the long game that I can see it sometime in the future.

The problem with this idea is there's a bunch of laws they'd have to change (or pass at least) to facilitate it. Good luck with them on that front. If the argument is they're not going to give a shit about those laws (eg, the obvious "Takings" issue) well there's the good old tinfoiler wet dream thing coming to life, because people won't stand for that.

-Mike

 

[drgrant]

Great! Thanks for giving us sotomayor and Kagen. They'll be ****ing us on 2A for another 30 years.

There are no guarantees that McCrap or Romney wouldn't have nominated weeblies, either. There's even precedent for this, Bush Sr. ****ed up with Souter. Big time. Yeah, we get it, Scalia is going to buy the farm eventually... but there are no guarantees on shitty GOP nominee doing the right thing in replacing him.

-Mike

 

[Buggin]

Personally, I think the economy and country will implode long before she gets a chance to do anything.
We simply cannot keep spending like this and not.

 

[Ben Cartwright SASS]

Tightening regulations will slowly strangle us, but as drgrant says it is the changing culture, other than in video games and movies few kids are exposed to the gun culture and even fewer to the none violent use of firearms, competitions etc.

The bottom line though is without ammo a gun is a club, remember the recent ammo shortage, you hoarded what little you had and didn't waste it go by going to the range...

The antis could do more to stop guns by drying up the supply of ammo and components

 

[GM-GUY]

If the country implodes under the massive debt - and it will no matter who gets elected; or a terror attack(s) happen (see Day of Wrath) - these will bring on Martial Law. This will allow the suspension of the CotUS.

The debt is currently ~$18.4 Trillion; GDP is currently ~$18.1 Trillion - no way this ends well, if you grow the economy by 10% per year (currently ~3% in cooked numbers) it will still take 10 years of (10% per year) with fixed spending and all the growth going to taxes to payoff the debt. When your GDP gets over ~5% iirc, inflation goes nuts.

We have imported hundreds of thousands from terrorist countries with little or no vetting; never mind the open borders and who knows who and what are coming in.

I still believe Hillary will be elected, and no crisis will go to waste. She is a screechy, slow person who has ridden others coat tails her whole life, if she is given control - there is no limit to what she will try.

 

[Shakeyfly]

They will either do a force buy back program, or make is so ridiculously hard to obtain a firearm that they will hope for natural attrition when gun owners die. Make it illegal to hand a firearm down in the family, and instead after death, the gun goes to the government.

I do find it funny, how people are saying that they would stand their ground against the government for their guns. In my opinion 99% of gun owners would turn in their firearms without a physical altercation. I'm sure they would forcefully say no, but they would will be yelling this is wrong, while still handing over their guns. No one is going to be firing from their windows at the cops coming to take your gun safes.

Also, I absolutely agree. Hillary is going to be the next president. The GOP line is too weak and Trump is a joke. I think it's a realistic expectation that Hillary would try executive orders to get guns banned, or hard to obtain, because we allow our Presidents to break laws.