They Are Not Coming to Take Your Guns – It May be Worse Than That

GOAL

NES Member
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Nov 21, 2007
Messages
487
Likes
869
handcuffs.jpg

They Are Not Coming to Take Your Guns – It May be Worse Than That



Jim Wallace



How many times have Second Amendment civil rights proponents heard that over the years? One of the biggest fears of lawful gun owners is that they will have their property taken from, and they will be defenseless. Will it happen? Maybe that is not their plan at all, and that should be the most concerning thing! Why, you ask?


Over the last decade or so we have quietly witnessed what I truly believe to be a new strategy. Imagine the physical optics and the cost to force lawful citizens to line up and turn in their guns. It would be an enormous task and the fallout could be disastrous. A much more insidious plan is what Massachusetts has already begun to do.


In 2016, the Massachusetts Attorney General singlehandedly reinterpreted nearly two decades of established law. Literally overnight, she changed the so-called assault weapons laws to suit her own political purposes. The result was a complete ban on an untold number of firearms. At first people thought that the AG had grandfathered all previous transfers and ownership. GOAL had to inform them that they were incorrect. There was no grandfathering, the AG just chose not to prosecute at that time. That is when we coined the phrase, “Felons in Waiting”.


What had actually transpired is that anyone who had transferred/possessed one of the unknown guns since the 1998 law passed was now a Felon in Waiting. I actually ran into a few folks at a service station where I get my oil changed after the AG action. They were very concerned and asked if they should get rid of any guns that might fall under the new ruling. They were a little shocked when I told them it didn’t matter. That is because in the AG’s eyes they had already committed the crime. So even if they got rid of them, they were still Felons in Waiting.


In a similar fashion, bump stock devices were banned, but no one came around looking for them. The legislature simply made them illegal. So, anyone who still has one is now a Felon in Waiting.


What if the plan is not to go around confiscating our guns, but rather to turn a huge sector of our society into Felons in Waiting? Why is that so bad, or good for them, you might ask. Simple, what better way to silence and intimidate your political enemies by holding a felony charge over their heads. The prosecution of it would mean imprisonment and the loss of all of their civil rights, not just the Second Amendment. This strategy costs virtually nothing, they don’t have the optics of confiscation, and they can carefully select who they enforce it against to make an example.


Imagine a nation with a hundred million or more carrying over their heads the label of Felon in Waiting? So maybe they really aren’t coming to physically take our guns, but our liberty as a whole.
 
Last edited:
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Jan 4, 2021
Messages
78
Likes
152
Do you want 10 states to leave the union? Because this is how you do it

Texas legislature is already beginning to talk about a grand exit again.......

I'm pretty sure that if Texas punches out that it will consume every cycle of every pol/bureaucrat in fed gov for an extended period of time.

If texas goes then so will Ok, Alabama, Missouri and a couple others.......

That means I40 and I70.....primary east/west transportation routes are bolluxed.

Obviously this is hypothesis but Texas really is discussing it in earnest again......the theat of a bunch of states punching out may trigger a stand down from some of the more radical elements in Congress
 

jkelly1229

NES Member
Rating - 100%
8   0   0
Joined
Nov 16, 2014
Messages
7,423
Likes
4,787
Texas legislature is already beginning to talk about a grand exit again.......

I'm pretty sure that if Texas punches out that it will consume every cycle of every pol/bureaucrat in fed gov for an extended period of time.

If texas goes then so will Ok, Alabama, Missouri and a couple others.......

That means I40 and I70.....primary east/west transportation routes are bolluxed.

Obviously this is hypothesis but Texas really is discussing it in earnest again......the theat of a bunch of states punching out may trigger a stand down from some of the more radical elements in Congress
Yeah I'm praying that I can move before it happens but I know I want to be on that side of it
 

FiremanBob

NES Member
Rating - 100%
4   0   0
Joined
Jan 22, 2009
Messages
4,634
Likes
11,148
Paging Matt Bracken to the white courtesy phone.

Paging Henry Bowman to the white courtesy phone.

Paging Mike Vanderboegh to the white courtesy phone.
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Dec 31, 2020
Messages
142
Likes
118
View attachment 435448

They Are Not Coming to Take Your Guns – It May be Worse Than That

Jim Wallace


How many times have Second Amendment civil rights proponents heard that over the years? One of the biggest fears of lawful gun owners is that they will have their property taken from, and they will be defenseless. Will it happen? Maybe that is not their plan at all, and that should be the most concerning thing! Why, you ask?

Over the last decade or so we have quietly witnessed what I truly believe to be a new strategy. Imagine the physical optics and the cost to force lawful citizens to line up and turn in their guns. It would be an enormous task and the fallout could be disastrous. A much more insidious plan is what Massachusetts has already begun to do.

In 2016, the Massachusetts Attorney General singlehandedly reinterpreted nearly two decades of established law. Literally overnight, she changed the so-called assault weapons laws to suit her own political purposes. The result was a complete ban on an untold number of firearms. At first people thought that the AG had grandfathered all previous transfers and ownership. GOAL had to inform them that they were incorrect. There was no grandfathering, the AG just chose not to prosecute at that time. That is when we coined the phrase, “Felons in Waiting”.

What had actually transpired is that anyone who had transferred/possessed one of the unknown guns since the 1998 law passed was now a Felon in Waiting. I actually ran into a few folks at a service station where I get my oil changed after the AG action. They were very concerned and asked if they should get rid of any guns that might fall under the new ruling. They were a little shocked when I told them it didn’t matter. That is because in the AG’s eyes they had already committed the crime. So even if they got rid of them, they were still Felons in Waiting.

In a similar fashion, bump stock devices were banned, but no one came around looking for them. The legislature simply made them illegal. So, anyone who still has one is now a Felon in Waiting.

What if the plan is not to go around confiscating our guns, but rather to turn a huge sector of our society into Felons in Waiting? Why is that so bad, or good for them, you might ask. Simple, what better way to silence and intimidate your political enemies by holding a felony charge over their heads. The prosecution of it would mean imprisonment and the loss of all of their civil rights, not just the Second Amendment. This strategy costs virtually nothing, they don’t have the optics of confiscation, and they can carefully select who they enforce it against to make an example.

Imagine a nation with a hundred million or more carrying over their heads the label of Felon in Waiting? So maybe they really aren’t coming to physically take our guns, but our liberty as a whole.
purposes. The result was a complete ban on an untold number of firearms. At first people thought that the AG had grandfathered all previous transfers and ownership. GOAL had to inform them that they were incorrect. There was no grandfathering, the AG just chose not to prosecute at that time. That is when we coined the phrase, “Felons in Waiting”.

What had actually transpired is that anyone who had transferred/possessed one of the unknown guns since the 1998 law passed was now a Felon in Waiting. I actually ran into a few folks at a service station where I get my oil changed after the AG action. They were very concerned and asked if they should get rid of any guns that might fall under the new ruling. They were a little shocked when I told them it didn’t matter. That is because in the AG’s eyes they had already committed the crime. So even if they got rid of them, they were still Felons in Waiting.

In a similar fashion, bump stock devices were banned, but no one came around looking for them. The legislature simply made them illegal. So, anyone who still has one is now a Felon in Waiting.

What if the plan is not to go around confiscating our guns, but rather to turn a huge sector of our society into Felons in Waiting? Why is that so bad, or good for them, you might ask. Simple, what better way to silence and intimidate your political enemies by holding a felony charge over their heads. The prosecution of it would mean imprisonment and the loss of all of their civil rights, not just the Second Amendment. This strategy costs virtually nothing, they don’t have the optics of confiscation, and they can carefully select who they enforce it against to make an example.

Imagine a nation with a hundred million or more carrying over their heads the label of Felon in Waiting? So maybe they really aren’t coming to physically take our guns, but our liberty as a whole.
Oh, Cripes! Wife and I are from North Carolina and
are .moving here on company edict to finish out the last 10 years of my career. All we have are FID compliant guns but are following advice to apply for LTC.
 

connor

NES Member
Rating - 100%
1   0   0
Joined
Apr 5, 2017
Messages
942
Likes
1,041
If you chip away at rights with "reasonable" measures, you ostracise the fringes and knock off the enemy with little resistance, slowly narrowing down to your end goal. Nobody cares who duncan lemp is, just some crazy anti government goon who must have committed some kind of firearms violation.
Divide and conquer.

We just have to get rid of the machine guns, sbrs, and silencers.
We just need to get rid of the post 86 mg's.
We just have to get rid of the assault weapons.
We just need to get rid of the bump stocks.
We just need to get rid of standard cap magazines.
We just need to get guns away from extremely risky people.
We just need to get rid of the concealed pistols (coming soon)
Etc.

How could you oppose such reasonable measures? They're common sense for godsake. Think of the children!


When you hold a felony over every gun owner, you wield an immeasurable amount of power. Don't go to a protest, don't cause a stir, don't shoot after dark, don't get a noise complaint at their club. Force them to believe they're all alone and everyone is against them.
 
Rating - 100%
1   0   0
Joined
Nov 8, 2005
Messages
26,317
Likes
4,607
don't care. this summer and election season taught me laws are not applicable anymore.
Stop signs and red lights are optional now?
:)

Death by a thousand cuts, Frog in a pot. Call it whatever you want but I don't think the next 4 years our going to bode will for the Republic.


cdbb5f5b-7196-4fe4-86fc-841671a01a88-jpeg.435127
 

Reptile

NES Member
Rating - 100%
108   0   0
Joined
Dec 13, 2006
Messages
18,748
Likes
8,412
Healey's FAQ on her guidance states that AR's and lowers that were possessed in Mass before 7/20/2016 are free to be transferred and or built up into complete AR's. Maintaining receipts could be important under scrutiny according to the FAQ.

The post Healey AR's that are eFA10'd as 5.56 could be the low hanging fruit for her harassment. Remove dog now.

Post Healey AR's eFA10'd as .22 are less problematic because .22 are not under her guidance. Assuming it did not start as an Assault Weapon. IANAL.

I'd say if you have an AR in 5.56 that was proven to be in Mass before 7/20/2016 - you will be able to sleep at night.

We all say her edict is not "law" so don't worry. I would worry even less of what is in her edict that she says is legal.




What if I already own a gun that is a copy or duplicate?​


If a weapon is a copy or duplicate of one of the models enumerated in the law, it is an Assault Weapon. The Enforcement notice will not be applied to possession, ownership or transfer by an individual gun owner of weapons obtained on or before July 20, 2016.
The AGO also will not enforce the law against a gun dealer that possesses or transfers a “copy or duplicate” weapon that was obtained on or before July 20, 2016, provided that transfers, if any, are made to persons or businesses in states where ownership of the weapon is legal.
 

calsdad

NES Member
Rating - 100%
28   0   0
Joined
Apr 24, 2006
Messages
41,438
Likes
19,982
Location
Chelmsford MA
Do you want 10 states to leave the union? Because this is how you do it

I think you're getting a little off topic here - Jim is (I think) - referring more to MA specific tyranny than other states.

Last time I checked Maura Healey doesn't hold dominion over any place other than MA - unless Biden appoints her to a Federal position.

The whole "felon in waiting" thing is sort of old news as well, that's a subject that was broached when her original edict came out. It didn't take too long for us to read what she wrote and figure out the felon in waiting thing.

I have to say - the other day the thought did enter my mind that it has been strangely quiet in this state in regards to guns for a while. What has Maura been doing ?
 

Reptile

NES Member
Rating - 100%
108   0   0
Joined
Dec 13, 2006
Messages
18,748
Likes
8,412
I think you're getting a little off topic here - Jim is (I think) - referring more to MA specific tyranny than other states.

Last time I checked Maura Healey doesn't hold dominion over any place other than MA - unless Biden appoints her to a Federal position.

The whole "felon in waiting" thing is sort of old news as well, that's a subject that was broached when her original edict came out. It didn't take too long for us to read what she wrote and figure out the felon in waiting thing.

I have to say - the other day the thought did enter my mind that it has been strangely quiet in this state in regards to guns for a while. What has Maura been doing ?
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IIZX2ebgtCQ
 

jkelly1229

NES Member
Rating - 100%
8   0   0
Joined
Nov 16, 2014
Messages
7,423
Likes
4,787
I think you're getting a little off topic here - Jim is (I think) - referring more to MA specific tyranny than other states.

Last time I checked Maura Healey doesn't hold dominion over any place other than MA - unless Biden appoints her to a Federal position.

The whole "felon in waiting" thing is sort of old news as well, that's a subject that was broached when her original edict came out. It didn't take too long for us to read what she wrote and figure out the felon in waiting thing.

I have to say - the other day the thought did enter my mind that it has been strangely quiet in this state in regards to guns for a while. What has Maura been doing ?
I moved because of that... to nh I still work in mass which I hate.... but I make over 6 figures and buy almost nothing in this state....I avoid using the pike if I have to go places in ma that require it.

However the point of this thread is a national scale not ma... that's why I said that
 

namedpipes

NES Member
Rating - 100%
3   0   0
Joined
May 7, 2008
Messages
36,523
Likes
24,299
Location
PREM
Texas legislature is already beginning to talk about a grand exit again.......

I'm pretty sure that if Texas punches out that it will consume every cycle of every pol/bureaucrat in fed gov for an extended period of time.

If texas goes then so will Ok, Alabama, Missouri and a couple others.......

That means I40 and I70.....primary east/west transportation routes are bolluxed.

Obviously this is hypothesis but Texas really is discussing it in earnest again......the theat of a bunch of states punching out may trigger a stand down from some of the more radical elements in Congress

Texas is in a perfect setting for seceding

They have seaports, natural resources and easy access to trade overland

Arlo Guthrie said it well. If one person (state) does it...
 
Top Bottom