What will YOU do if the government attempts to take your guns?

[Clockwork]

Not before I shoot myself in the face with both barrels of a sawed-off 10 gauge after seeing another one of these threads.

You won't deliver...

 

[JADB]

not before i shoot myself in the face with both barrels of a sawed-off 10 gauge after seeing another one of these threads.

amen!

 

[Texan2]

Video on the UN small arms treaty. YouTube - ‪URGENT: Hillary Clinton Signs UN Small Arms Treaty PT 1‬‏


I can tell you living now in Texas it's much different they many places outside of Texas. Try living in Illinois were I did or the NE. It's very anti gun and this is by the politicans. You can claim we are all wearing tin foil hats however it's coming. When a populace loses it's firearm's they are subdued. Just look at history. I would rather be writing, emailing calling our lawmakers about not doing a thing to take away our 2nd Amendment rights then claim that no one will come to take our arms. I don't believe anyone will show up at the door saying I want them, it will be gradual. Like allowing only one firearm a month, etc.

I moved here last year. Two months before I moved there was an interesting incident. A gentleman went on vacation, he was also a gun collector. Two days after he leaves the police show up and load approximatly 200 weapons into a van and take them away. (I will see if I can get the picture of guns without cases tossed on top of each other like cordwood) The reason why? They said someone could have broken into the home and taken the weapons so they thought it best to do this. No charges in the incident whatsoever. He wasn't a known collector but apparently somone called the police and said he had guns in the house. In Illinois you can get arrested for having ONE round of ammuntion without a FOID card. I have also seen that happen. Texas is different but you still have to be vigilent, it's a much different world out there in many places.

Here is the video of the above incident. It was 3 blocks from my home. They state there was a burglary, however there was none, there was no crime. Would you want your gun collection taken and tossed like these with NO charges. Yes the 4th amendment was violated and where did the weapons go? They weren't returned and what happened to the home??? I was condemned so he's no be allowed to live there. Yes freedoms are taken away and if you stick your head in the sand one day you will wake up have nothing left just like the 67 year old man.

YouTube - ‪NEWS: Rockford Illinois: 300 guns seized from crime VICTIM‬‏

So the point is what? Don't live in Illinois?

It scares me when I hear people buying into the "The U.N. is coming to take our guns!!!" Ain't happening, the U.N. can have all the treaties it wants, it won't mean you cant buy/own/shoot guns in this country. I was merely sharing my views regarding the NRA's decision to stoop to such conspiracy tactics to garner more money from us. Despite having Obama in the WH, more states are passing pro gun carry laws than at any time in our history. Obama can do nothing about gun control with the House in Republican hands.
Be vigilant...
Dont be crazy.

 

[Mexican_Hippie]

WTH? We need a tinfoil hat section.

This is a seriously good idea. Then all these threads can get moved to one spot so the "government" can spy on them with more efficiency.

Besides, I'm always debating on where I should post my threads

 

[DaRedneck]

I'm no legal expert but I do wonder how a UN treaty would affected small arms in the US. Can a treaty trump an ammendment? I wouldn't think so even though article VI of the Constitution states that any treaty that the feds make, will be the law of the land and all the states will be bound by that law (treaty). I dunno how a treaty could trump an ammendment itself though. I would suppose it could not or the libs would have just signed some treaty a long time ago to circumvent 2A.

Article VI, paragraph 2: "This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding."

edit: I think maybe the notwithstanding part is what prevents it from trumping 2A????

 

[BG1960]

The UN didn't stop Texas from Stickin' that turd last night, I doubt real seriously they will talk anyone from anywhere into walking up to doors and confiscating weapons in our great State.

 

[Texan2]

In Reid v. Covert the Supreme Court in 1957 wrote in the majority opinion that:

There is nothing in this language which intimates that treaties and laws enacted pursuant to them do not have to comply with the provisions of the Constitution. Nor is there anything in the debates which accompanied the drafting and ratification of the Constitution which even suggests such a result. These debates as well as the history that surrounds the adoption of the treaty provision in Article VI make it clear that the reason treaties were not limited to those made in "pursuance" of the Constitution was so that agreements made by the United States under the Articles of Confederation, including the important peace treaties which concluded the Revolutionary War, would remain in effect. It would be manifestly contrary to the objectives of those who created the Constitution, as well as those who were responsible for the Bill of Rights – let alone alien to our entire constitutional history and tradition – to construe Article VI as permitting the United States to exercise power under an international agreement without observing constitutional prohibitions. In effect, such construction would permit amendment of that document in a manner not sanctioned by Article V. The prohibitions of the Constitution were designed to apply to all branches of the National Government and they cannot be nullified by the Executive or by the Executive and the Senate combined.
There is nothing new or unique about what we say here. This Court has regularly and uniformly recognized the supremacy of the Constitution over a treaty.
​

 

[DaRedneck]

Kick ass. Thanks Texan2. Glad to know cause I've wondered how that would work and I guessed correctly.

 

[jordanmills]

Fret not. There are far too many firearms in the hands of law-abiding citizens who will not stand for disarmament.

The Gun Grabbers will never go after the guns in the hands of criminals, so they seek to disarm those who follow the law.

More than 60 million Americans own guns, but less than Three (3) million are members of the National Rifle Association (NRA), Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, The Second Amendment Foundation, and Jews for the Preservation of Fiirearms.

If you own a gun, are law abiding, but don't belong to the NRA (or any other gun-rights organization), you are no better than an otherwise honorable citizen collecting food stamps and welfare.

How many folks who post on this forum are annual or LIFE MEMBERS of the NRA?

I don't take lightly that others enjoy the freedoms I and others have worked hard to preserve, without them making a similar commitment to liberty and freedom.

Be well.

Wrong. The NRA has a lot of alarmist nonsense and only supports gun causes politically favorable to them. I'm seriously considering dropping my NRA membership. I already dropped my TSRA membership for similar reasons.

 

[woolleyworm]

This is a seriously good idea. Then all these threads can get moved to one spot so the "government" can spy on them with more efficiency.

Besides, I'm always debating on where I should post my threads

Great idea!

As for what I would do if they wanted to take my guns; I would gladly drink up the Kool-Aid and hand over all the guns in my house and let them fully inspect my home. Being the good sheeple that I am, I would even invite them to stay for dinner; I LOVE THE ATF AND BIG BROTHER WATCHING OVER ME ! It makes me feel safe and taken care of. ( just had to state this "for the record" and all...... )

 

[jordanmills]

I'm no legal expert but I do wonder how a UN treaty would affected small arms in the US. Can a treaty trump an ammendment? I wouldn't think so even though article VI of the Constitution states that any treaty that the feds make, will be the law of the land and all the states will be bound by that law (treaty). I dunno how a treaty could trump an ammendment itself though. I would suppose it could not or the libs would have just signed some treaty a long time ago to circumvent 2A.

Article VI, paragraph 2: "This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding."

edit: I think maybe the notwithstanding part is what prevents it from trumping 2A????

You're right. It's also something few people argue when they talk about supremacy.

 

[Mexican_Hippie]

Ok, hypothetical game on....

First one would have to clarify "Government." There's really only a few options:

World Government (UN): This is laughable. If any president allowed foreign troops on our soil this WOULD cause a shit storm. People have a lot less of a problem shooting foreigners in funny blue hats than they do their "own". The president would also be impeached for treason and/or assassinated, maybe even a temporary military coup by the top brass. This move would be suicide for any president. Would not happen.

US Government (assuming ATF): From a purely logistical standpoint this is impractical. According to my interwebs sources there's about 2,500 agents. There's >50,000,000 households that own guns, with >250,000,000 guns out there. Even if everyone showed up and threw them in a pile they wouldn't be able to dispose of them all without contracting help.

State / Local Government: There's not a single Texas LEO I know that would start disarming the mass public. Maybe in a few cities a few would, but this would be an anomaly. ATF couldn't do it without State/Local, so basically it wouldn't happen.

Say the government declares martial law and uses willing servicemen. There would still be a HUGE blackmarket, I'm thinking like 10x that of illegal drugs today. I predict poeple would partially cave and hand over a couple token crappy guns and keep all the good stuff hidden. It would be short lived like prohibition.

There is no practical way this would or could ever happen. No one is going to come take your guns.

 

[woolleyworm]

Ok, hypothetical game on....

There is no practical way this would or could ever happen. No one is going to come take your guns.

Try telling this to the Brits or Aussies. It can and has happened in other countries and while I agree 100% that this could never happen in the America that we see today; do not think that if the liberal debauchery that is continuing to degrade this country could not cause it in the future.

 

[Mexican_Hippie]

What we need is to counter Idiocracy.

We just need to get the TGT'ers to all have a bunch of gun-loving kids. I've already had 4 so I'm done. Some of y'all need to buck up now

 

[DMC]

Have you guys ever thought that maybe they don't want our crappy little antiquated pea shooters?

For less than the cost of a quality AR with good optics I could build a focused laser array that could kill at a mile or more.
I am pretty sure they would take my pea shooters if I built one.
By the way google the new laser the navy has. It burns through out board engines in rough seas. Imagine what that would do to your pea shooter?

Microwave weapons anyone? They can cook you from miles away. Guess who has those?

Sound weapons? They got those too. Hard to shoot your pea shooter when your eyes, ears, and nose are spewing blood.

Rail-guns? Not sure if these are perfected yet. If they were would we know about it?

I am sure there are a lot more I am not aware of.
I love my pea shooters but they don't stand up to technology.
I think they like to toy around with us by threatening to take away our guns. I don't think they even care about taking them away, as long as we don't get the good stuff.

 

[Texan2]

If you own a gun, are law abiding, but don't belong to the NRA (or any other gun-rights organization), you are no better than an otherwise honorable citizen collecting food stamps and welfare.

1st place for most ridiculous statement of the year.

 

[Glockster69]

It was just a hobby I gave up when it became so controversial.

Sir, according to our records, you purchased 3 new guns last month.
Just when did you give up this hobby?

 

[majormadmax]

WTH? We need a tinfoil hat section.

Seriously. Some of us are on the "inside" and would see indications of this long before it would happen.

Secondly, a large majority of people I know who work for the government and/or are in the military are very pro-gun and well familiar with a little document called the Constitution. Contrary to the belief of some, we/they are able to disobey an illegal order, which this would be. People in the government are accountable for their actions, and the excuse of "I was only following orders" didn't work for William Calley and it won't work now.

Of course, one would risk being charged under Art 94 of the UCMJ, but that would be a risk many would be willing to take, in my opinion since it does involve what can be described as the commission of a crime.

It's funny how you can look through any major gun forum on the Internet, and there's always these tin hat threads about such things; but it never seems to happen.

There's plenty of other things to worry about in life, quit making more stuff up!

Plus, since I don't own any guns, so I'm not worried about it!

Cheers! M2

 

[majormadmax]

1st place for most ridiculous statement of the year.

C'mon now, he's still got almost six months left in the year to make even more ridiculous statements!

 

[Jakashh]

Not before I shoot myself in the face with both barrels of a sawed-off 10 gauge after seeing another one of these threads.

But you'll break your trigger finger!