-
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
If Obama is Elected, What are YOU buying?
- Thread starter USMA-82
- Start date
kevin9
NES Member
Western Pattern Al Scoop
Cabela's® Alaskan Guide™ Dry-Plus® Breathable Waders 
IPT by Gorman-Rupp Heavy-Duty Trash Pump
Think it's deep now? It's going to get a lot deeper if Obamaram is elected.
So what would that mean if you already owned something that wasn't grandfathered? , confiscation?
That would be problematic...........
Indeed.
Though I still can't find legitimate references to the rumor that Barack Obama had people consulting with Australian officials on gun control, I did reread the NRA article and his connection to anti-gun forces are unsettling.
http://www.nraila.org/Issues/Articles/Read.aspx?id=321&issue=047
I didn't think you did (agree with it).
Just because it wont pass - doesn't mean they wont try. And with the current economic issues - it is potentially the "right" (from the gun banners point of view) time to take advantage and try to ram a bill thru - or do it thru Presidential order.
The govt. has already nationalized banks on not much more than the say of a bureaucrat - times like this are historically just the sorts of justification people in govt. need to do all sorts of extracurricular activities.
Put Obama in - and I believe that the chance of anti gun activity of some form or another goes way up. Legal or not - valid or not. The guy is a liar plain and simple, I don't put anything past him.
This is the way to respond, liberal or conservative, emphasize facts and commonality before being dismissive.
*Anyone who advocates reducing your rights or the rights of any other American individual or group*(quote, Raoul Duke), does not truly understand what being an american is, IMHO. Your opinion is valid Cubj3, but under the framework of the constitution it is not logical.
Last edited:
He'll sign whatever anti-gun measure comes in front of him, and that alone is enough to embolden the Liberals in Congress to try to pass anything and everything they can.
If the day comes that the govt. retroactively bans "things" we will all have some very serious choices to make.
While I would much prefer that there was no registration whatsoever -as the founding fathers intended, that is not what we are dealing with today.
But I also think that the all of the tracking and dealer records does give us a certain advantage - it lets the govt know just how big any sort of confiscation endeavor will be. So you take some ignorant politician and show him the firearms database - with a printout showing just how massive any confiscation scheme would be - and that alone might be enough to stop the whole thing dead in it's tracks. They might still try it - but it would in all likelihood start off as a "voluntary" thing - just like they were in Canada and Australia and England.
So the question everybody has to ask themselves is - how serious am I? How willing am I to risk imprisonment to not "voluntarily" turn in my firearms?
Once significant numbers of "citizens" start refusing to hand over their firearms then the whole thing starts to spiral out of control. Because at that point the govt. has to make a decision as to how far they want to go to enforce the confiscation. As the force used to enforce the confiscation ratchets up - so will the resistance.
If this happens you don't need to necessarily bury them - they just need to never be where the jackboots are looking for them. This will start a frenzy of searching - which will just ratchet the whole thing up to another level.
April 19, 1775 is a good example of what CAN happen when govt. forces ratchet up their use of force to enforce unjust laws. But on that day there was a not-insignificant percentage of the population that was willing to do something about it. Does that still exist in this country? I don't honestly know. There are a lot of people that talk big - but if push came to shove it is unclear how people would react.
This is why education is important - and why getting more people to buy guns is important. If the day comes that the govt. decides to confiscate what you want is as large a percentage of the population as possible to own the firearms in question that are being confiscated. What you don't need is to have a large part of the gun owner population be Fudds who think to themselves "well that doesn't affect me". If the shit is going to come down - you want to suck as many people as possible into it. This both makes the likelihood of something like confiscation happening go down - while making the chance of people fighting back if it does happen - go up.
Last time I checked there was something like 250 million firearms in this country. That number has gone up by something like 100 million since the early 90's. Think about that - since the early 90's when the last ban went into effect - Americans have accumulated another 100 million firearms. From the inception of the country - until the early 90's we accumulated 150 million or so - then when they tried to ban - we decided to accumulate another 100 million more. I don't know what the numbers are on what % of the population owns guns (there is a difference between 250 million people owning 1 gun each - and 1 million people each owning 250 guns). What you want is to spread gun ownership as extensively across the population as possible. Having gun ownership concentrated among a small % of the population means one stop shopping when they finally get around to confiscation - spreading it out make the confiscation immensely harder.
If it looks like confiscation starts - most of my guns will "disappear". I will probably go to jail - but as a gun owner you may well go to jail anyway, even if you do turn them in. If confiscation starts gun owners should think seriously about heading for the hills - of ME, NH - or VT.
The day gun confiscation starts serious shiite is going down in this country - and thinking that you are going to let it all pass and be able to settle down the Pat's game next Sunday is just wishful thinking.
Calsdad, you're right.
Only flaw in it is that there is no true Federal database as to who owns what. There are a few state databases, where the state mandates record keeping of sales, or outright registration.
Now, the NICS check isn't even remotely close to a database, even if they defy the law, and keep the records. Having made some NICS calls myself, I can say that all they know about the firearm is handgun or long arm, nothing more. I don't even think they know quantity.
The 4473's and bound books could be gotten from the FFL's, but that won't work so well, as word will travel fast enough that some FFL's will defy law enforcement (an oxymoron in this case) and dispose of the records, probably vanishing themseves.
Besides, it's a little known fact that an FFL can retire his records after a certain amount of time. I won't mention the length it is, though.
Only flaw in it is that there is no true Federal database as to who owns what. There are a few state databases, where the state mandates record keeping of sales, or outright registration.
Now, the NICS check isn't even remotely close to a database, even if they defy the law, and keep the records. Having made some NICS calls myself, I can say that all they know about the firearm is handgun or long arm, nothing more. I don't even think they know quantity.
The 4473's and bound books could be gotten from the FFL's, but that won't work so well, as word will travel fast enough that some FFL's will defy law enforcement (an oxymoron in this case) and dispose of the records, probably vanishing themseves.
Besides, it's a little known fact that an FFL can retire his records after a certain amount of time. I won't mention the length it is, though.
If I missed something earlier in the thread (I didn't read every page) I didn't mean to steal your thunder!
This takes me back, to the 1990's, when Klinton was President.....Ambrose Evans Pritchard wrote in his book, "The Secret Life of BIll Clinton", the author commented on the militias that were being formed all over the country.
"The Clinton era has spawned an armed militia movement involving tens of thousands of people. The last time anything like this occurred was in the 1860s with the emergence of the southern gun clubs. It is easy to dismiss the militia as right-wing nuts; it is much harder to read the complex sociology of civic revolt. At the very least the militias reveal the hatred building up against the irksome yuppies who run the country."
I expect the same thing to happen again under an Obama presidency.
My fear is not the obvious anti-gun legislation that might be proposed. I think Congress would vote that down, even the Democrat reps. remember the mess the AWB got them into last time (also there are enough pro-gun Dems to help here).
The issue is some sort of crap that'll be sneaked into the back-door. IRC the AWB was a small part of a much larger crime-bill. I imagine you'll see more of that sort of legislation. Something fairly innocuous on the outside, with an anti-gun item tagged onto the end.
Even that anti-gun legislation may appear to be "sensible" to many gun-owners. It will, I'm afraid, be a death of a thousand cuts. Little bits of legislation that make it that much harder, and more expensive to shoot. We may suffer the pain of this, but it's unlikely our kids or grand-kids (depending on how old you are) will bother to put up with it. They'll take up golf or some other hobby.
Eventually the number of lawful gun-owners will dwindle to a number where confiscations can happen.
The issue is some sort of crap that'll be sneaked into the back-door. IRC the AWB was a small part of a much larger crime-bill. I imagine you'll see more of that sort of legislation. Something fairly innocuous on the outside, with an anti-gun item tagged onto the end.
Even that anti-gun legislation may appear to be "sensible" to many gun-owners. It will, I'm afraid, be a death of a thousand cuts. Little bits of legislation that make it that much harder, and more expensive to shoot. We may suffer the pain of this, but it's unlikely our kids or grand-kids (depending on how old you are) will bother to put up with it. They'll take up golf or some other hobby.
Eventually the number of lawful gun-owners will dwindle to a number where confiscations can happen.
I had forgotten the details of the NICS checks - thanks for the info. Unfortunately under my theory I think that the lack of info might actually increase the likelihood of confiscation - or decrease it (not knowing specific firearm type might decrease the likelihood when the theoretical gun-grabber pol sees how many millions of gun owners there are) - or, it might increase the likelihood by making the pols make it "voluntary" - like the England/Australia/Canada examples I talked about.
What would be needed at that point would be a "stop snitching" type of campaign (like you see in the inner city where they refuse to talk to cops).
We would need a "only traitors volunteer" or some such thing to drum it into people's heads that NOBODY should voluntarily hand in their firearms.
If nobody volunteers - then once again the govt. is faced with a choice, ratchet it up - or back off. Unfortunately in the grand scheme of historical events if any of this transpires we are still marching along the road to loss of gun rights. It has already been shown (thru the first AWB - and now the possibility of another - more strict one) - that the gun banners will never stop. Sooner or later it is going to come back to some sort of historical showdown.
The latest issue of American Rifleman has an article about how the British enforced confiscation in Boston after the April 19 incident - they promised to give the guns back to their owners, it never happened.
Advice (Take it, you must): "Do or do not... there is no try." - Jedi Master Yoda, StarWars
And a caution (the Member's Section is not 'safe'): "We shall meet in the place where there is no darkness" - George Orwell, 1984
Last edited:
The chair is against the wall
The Fudd Evasion. So long as you have a shotgun that you only use on clay birdies, you're safe.
For now.
So vote for me and I'll screw you last.![[puke]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/023.gif "Puke [puke]")
These democrats always seem to become shooters at election time ... Remember THIS primary season classic?
“You know, my dad took me out behind the cottage that my grandfather built on a little lake called Lake Winola outside of Scranton and taught me how to shoot when I was a little girl.” - Hillary Clinton
Wow two whole shotguns! He's one of us now! Biden and Obamessiah, please forgive me for ever doubting you.
The shotgun will be at the end of the list of guns to grab, because 1. It might make all the Fudds actually pay attention, and 2. It isn't much of a threat to a well guarded politician due to its short range... scoped hunting rifles will be a higher priority for grabbing.
The shotgun will be at the end of the list of guns to grab, because 1. It might make all the Fudds actually pay attention, and 2. It isn't much of a threat to a well guarded politician due to its short range... scoped hunting rifles will be a higher priority for grabbing.
The dolphins are in the Hot Tub!
Twigg
NES Member
More like the frogs are in the pot.
![[thinking]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/010.gif "Thinking [thinking]")
Probably actually one gun: OVER and UNDER...
![[grin]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/041.gif "Grin [grin]")
And Biden probably didn't know what it meant either... he probably asked one of his staff to go look up some shotgun-related terms that the general (non-gun) public would not know, so that he could throw it into his speech to look like he knows what he's talking about.
I wonder how many of those Pennsylvania sportsmen take a Beretta out for some sporting clay action, like Biden claims to do? Some Berretta models run some serious money. But, I guess if the mill's closed down and you're out of work and out of luck, as Obama says they are out there, then you're going to cling to your gun and it might as well be top shelf.
I think that Obama and Biden need to do a better job coordinating their pandering ...
I think that Obama and Biden need to do a better job coordinating their pandering ...
namedpipes
NES Member
Biden knows those terms already. He architected the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban.
Gun ban proponents don't necessarily know their terminology ... like "the shoulder thing that goes up". That was Congresswoman Carolyn McCarthy's understanding of a "barrel shroud", if you'll recall.
Similar threads
