Everyone has their line

But where is your line? First i'd like to say I hate violence. I never endorse violence and I would be the first to defend a stranger if he is being unjustly beaten up by a large mob. Some of you, if you even remember who I am, might find my views a bit extreme. That is ok.

I come here today to ask a simple question, because it is very important to the foundations of 2A.

There are limtless scenario types, but I'll just stick with the simplest. Let's say some law is passed, despite the objections and outcry of pro-2a groups, that ban guns. Part of that bill required local police to go door to door confiscating them, and (Since you guys have lovely registered CW permits or OC permits) they come straight to your door, hungry for your Wilson Combat 1911.

The next part of the question will seperate the Armchair warriors from the men.
Are you so passionate about your rights that you are willing, if necessary, to die in defense of them?

In this case, would you let the cops know somehow that if they attempt to unconstitutionally violate your rights and take your weapons they will be met with extreme force? If they ignored your warning and came anyways, would you resist using force?

Or would you cower down, comply with the Authority like a drone all the while voicing your complaints.

This is not some "Will you go down in a blaze of glory fantasy", it's simple a question to all of you individually asking if you have the balls your founding fathers had.

P.s. a simple "yes" or "no" will suffice.

My wife asked what I would do if confronted with this situation. I told her it would be she that would have a decision to make. When she asked why it would be her decision, I explained that she would have 2 choices. She could leave and live or stay and load. Answer your question?

rodbender said:

My wife asked what I would do if confronted with this situation. I told her it would be she that would have a decision to make. When she asked why it would be her decision, I explained that she would have 2 choices. She could leave and live or stay and load. Answer your question?

Click to expand...

While I don't have a wife, a few people I know would be barricading themselves in, me being one of them. Theres only, what, 2-4 million police and military (out of my ass figure), and what, 150 million gun (another OOMA figure)? Kind of a daunting task if you ask me, especially if those involved in the gun grab want to see the sun rise the next day.

Will everyone fight back? Probably not. Will a lot of people fight back? More then likely. I'll be one of them

I'd be heart broken if they confiscated my only handgun, my hipoint, because I lost all my other guns in a tragic boating accident a couple months ago.

i will have a shootout old west style
and maybe its a good idea to buy body armor a flamethrower some claymore mines and bear traps to put around your house
backup power water food cameras outside nightvision gogles handgrenades .................

flb_78 said:

I'd be heart broken if they confiscated my only handgun, my hipoint, because I lost all my other guns in a tragic boating accident a couple months ago.

Click to expand...

how did you lose all of them in a boat accident? you live in a house boat?

Load up. Head to the hills. G'luck with that.

There is another choice.

Your choices are submit or die.

Resistance does not necessarily have to end in defeat.

The 2A was meant to give the people a viable means of resistance. Many on this forum are better armed than the local National Guard Armory, and most here are probably a better shot.

We are a people that refuse tyranny. King George thought he could take away our gund and impose unjust taxes. Didn't happen then, won't happen now.

Our guns are our liberty teeth. Don't try to extract them, we hate dentists.

Live Free or Die,
Thundar

I mean with a whopping 208 justified defensive homocides each year you would have to be plain stupid to not buy into carrying a firearm everywhere.

If such a law were passed and went into effect tomorrow, it would most assuredly mean the second civil war.

It's rather silly to think you would have to fight alone, especially if you live in a pro-2A state. The odds of states like Texas enforcing such a law are simply nonexistent, especially when they are already passing laws to throw the bird at the fed. With the recent supreme court ruling, it would pretty much be The Brady Bunch vs everyone else. Such a war would be short and decisive for sure.

God, I do love this country!

A quote, Brian keith in the movie Young Guns.
"Who wants to stay and dance"

It is not just us that understand a sweeping gun confiscation would be met with force. The government knows it, the military knows it and police know it. I do not think that it will come to that. That having been said, I can assure you that I will still do what is necessary to support and defend the Constitution. I don't believe that a DD214 relieves you of your duties as a patriot. I am also bound by the love for my family to protect them even if it means leaving them.

Some of these things sound a little extreme but many who read and post here understand perfectly well.

God bless America DEFENSOR FORTIS

DEFENSOR said:

A quote, Brian keith in the movie Young Guns.
"Who wants to stay and dance"

It is not just us that understand a sweeping gun confiscation would be met with force. The government knows it, the military knows it and police know it. I do not think that it will come to that. That having been said, I can assure you that I will still do what is necessary to support and defend the Constitution. I don't believe that a DD214 relieves you of your duties as a patriot. I am also bound by the love for my family to protect them even if it means leaving them.

Some of these things sound a little extreme but many who read and post here understand perfectly well.

God bless America DEFENSOR FORTIS

Click to expand...

Doubt it.

Jack House said:

If such a law were passed and went into effect tomorrow, it would most assuredly mean the second civil war.
It's rather silly to think you would have to fight alone, especially if you live in a pro-2A state. The odds of states like Texas enforcing such a law are simply nonexistent, especially when they are already passing laws to throw the bird at the fed. With the recent supreme court ruling, it would pretty much be The Brady Bunch vs everyone else. Such a war would be short and decisive for sure.

Click to expand...

What a ludicrious statement. How many gun owners would get cut down by armored assault vehicles to keep their guns? Not many. And those nuts that would lay down their lives would get dis-heartened when snipers, aerial support, and fighting vehicles crush that hypothetical weak opposition. Second Civil War, please.

The elitist Leftists are panty wetting afraid because they know that gun owners represent the only viable threat to their desire for power and control. And it isn't the gun owner's guns that they are afraid of..... it is the concept of liberty, the independence of spirit, the refusal to kiss ass, the courage to stand up, that the gun represents that they fear.

Consider the reaction of a Leftist who gets right up in the face of a person openly carrying a gun and begins to shout about how intimidated and scared that gun makes them "feel". Total BS. They are neither "scared" nor "intimidated"... they are enraged that someone is showing them they have the courage and convictions to openly carry a gun and the Leftist knows he has no power to control them.

Scratch a Leftist elitist and you will find an arrogant control freak convinced they, and they alone, are God's gift to humanity innately possessing the intellect that all "those common people" lack.

So the OP's premise is

Let's say some law is passed, despite the objections and outcry of pro-2a groups, that ban guns. Part of that bill required local police to go door to door confiscating them

Click to expand...

.

Let's look at that a moment. That law, presuming it is a federal law, puts several agencies and their bloated buracracies out of business, as they existed as a bunch of paper-pushers and beancounters, not as field-experienced law enforcement agencies. It needs to replace them with jack-booted thugs (JBTs), which are already in great demand by other buracracies who historically are not known for inter-agency cooperation and resource sharing. The enacting of this law also presumes that there has been some sort of great social upheaval that allows/permits such an obnoxiously obvious violation of the Constitution (2A and 5A are my basic beginning points).

Yes, we have recently seen other legislation which may or may not eventually be ruled unconstitutional (Obamacare being the most quickly recognized), and the Congress does seem to be more willing to play fast and loose with "deeming" a bill as passed rather than actually voting on it. But what we have not yet seen is the end of the legal wrangling that is in the hopper trying to resolve the questions of "is it legal?" and "can they get away with that?" before much action takes place regarding the enforcement of the legislation.

Now, if the law the OP proposes was passed at the State level, I offer up the question of "Who really thinks that all 50 (or 57, depending on who you ask how many there are) States would pass the exact same law at -approximately - the same time?"

It seems like a great fantasy - or nightmare - to contemplate such a situation, but there are just too many prtacticalities to make the proposition more than that.

As for the practical side of things - post-Katrina we saw LEOs both confiscating firearms and enforcing laws to confiscate firearms, but we saw that they were doing it selectively. They were quite the active bunch when faced with no meaningful opposition (mere vocal resistance) but not quite the same when confronted with a whole neighborhood of armed folks who said "No way!", let alone the solitary homeowner who demanded to be treated "with benign neglect" while holding his shotgun. What are the chances that things have changed so much on their side?

stay safe.

EG&G Technical Services Employee said:

What a ludicrious statement. How many gun owners would get cut down by armored assault vehicles to keep their guns? Not many. And those nuts that would lay down their lives would get dis-heartened when snipers, aerial support, and fighting vehicles crush that hypothetical weak opposition. Second Civil War, please.

Click to expand...

You're spot on, there, Mr. Military History Expert....

Just a few things I'd like you to explain.

If a rag-tag band of poorly-armed civilians can't prevail against a super power, then what happened in Afghanistan to the Mongols in the middle ages, or the Brits in the 1800's, or the USSR in the `1980's, or, let's be honest, the US currently?

What happened to the US in Vietnam?

The Brits in America in 1776 and 1812?


The fact is, that in the recent history (the last 500+ years anyway) of military action, incursive forces of large superpowers almost ALWAYS get their asses handed to them when they try to take on indigenous populations.

All the Predator Drones in the world won't win a war if you don't know where the fresh water sources and hidey-holes are, but the "locals" do...

Wake up, dude. Stop drinking the kool-aid at your employer's commissary.

I am with you on the non-violence. This, in a very round-about way, is why I carry.

But any basic rights, 2A or otherwise, deserve our defense and defiance if it comes to that. Remember: Our forefathers were traitors to the crown, ex-patriots, even terrorists... at the time.

I certainly hope that we avoid another bloody revolution and I honestly believe that we will... but if it comes to that I would die to defend those rights as I would any member of my family from harm.

That's the troll from earlier, I ignored him on purpose.

However, since I am posting anyway...


I don't think it would be a fight between citizens and the government. I think it would be a fight between Washington, Washington loyalists and the Brady Bunch vs pretty much everyone else. This even includes at least part, if not most, of the military. This is all thanks to the recent SCOTUS decision. But even barring that, you will still have state militia support from pro-gun states.

Right now would be a very bad time for the fed to try anything that heavy handed, after all, a lot of states are already rebelling against Washington.

how much ammo should the average person have for the coming civil war?
should i buy a kentucky rifle?
what about a white hair whig?
white stockings?
a flute?

Post Heller / McDonald, such hypotheticals are meaningless and make us look less than the legal and legislative professionals that we are.

Mass confiscation of all firearms, instigated either by the federal or state government, would be struck down as unconstitutional.

The fight has now moved to one of attrition, where the antis will try to nibble away at the types of firearms and ammo that may be possessed and carried and the places where we may carry.

In response, we need to focus on continuing the streak of legislative and judicial successes we have seen over the last several decades at all levels of government and continue to liberalize our gun laws. We need to make gun ownership a normal and healthy part of a civil society.

What to do to make this happen?
--------------------------------------

- Raise your children to be gun owners!
- Take a friend or co-worker shooting
- Open Carry and be a goodwill ambassador for gun rights
- Join your state gun-rights group
- Join the NRA
- Join GOA
- Work tirelessly to elect only pro-gun representatives at all levels of government


John