Question of the Day: Can America Be Disarmed?

Billy Johnson makes the case that there are only two ways to grab Americans’ guns: 1) abandon the republican principles on which the nation was founded, or 2) voluntary disarmament. Under number one has the .gov declaring gun owners enemies of the state. A threat to law, order, peace and tranquility. And Mr. Johnson says our representatives lack the power and the right to do it. As for number two, good luck with that. Ultimately, in his view, the responsibility for holding our elected officials accountable for their RKBA infringing tendencies, something that seems to work better in some locales than others. But back to the original question. Billy is of the opinion that our government can’t disarm us. You?

comments

  1. avatar AmericanSpirit says:

    Nope.

    That cat is long out of the bag.

    The sheer number of boating accidents in CT and the rise of the Mexican autodefensas with guns previously squirreled away prove that any attempt at centralized disarmament (voluntary or otherwise) is a nothing but a pipe dream.

    1. avatar DJ says:

      Tell that to the Brits.

      1. avatar Simon says:

        Every so often, you hear of a story of a British homeowner tearing down a wall of his home and finding guns stored away. I would bet that even in England, many people still have guns hidden away somewhere: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2266958/Builder-discovers-deadly-haul-30-shotguns-pistols-hidden-false-wall-days-Dunblane-massacre.html

        But like good little serfs, the idiots that make the news always give the guns to the government.

        1. avatar Cliff H says:

          The English have a long tradition of boating. Accidents are common.

      2. avatar AmericanSpirit says:

        I’ll politely point you towards “The Troubles” in Northern Ireland as an example of what happens when one royally (irony intended) pisses decent people off and tell them they can’t have guns for their own safety, and then uses resistance to armed occupation as justification.

        They’ll find their own way to get guns. The inventive will also figure out how to make improvised heavy weapons (see the barracks buster mortar on Wikipedia as only a single example).

        Plus, think about how fast a country like the People’s Republic of China would flood the ‘disarmed’ market here in the States with true (rock-n-roll status) assault rifles for a pittance. It’d be a win-win for them on several levels, just like how the Soviets loved to supply the IRA with goodies.

        1. avatar De Facto says:

          You don’t even need a gun. “Wrist Rockets” and modern slingshots such as those you can purchase at walmart are capable of shooting a steel ball bearing at a speed where you can kill a human – as the IRA proved to the British. Repeatedly.

      3. avatar Davis Thompson says:

        Brits are not Americans.

      4. avatar Marine 03 says:

        Brits don’t have a 2nd Amendment or its equivelant. Brits didn’t fight a war against a tyrannical government after they attempted to disarm the citizenry. Brits didn’t carve a nation out of a wild frontier with all the history that entails. Brits never had the per capita gone ownership America had even when “revolvers” were legal there.

        1. avatar P.M.Lawrence says:

          “Brits didn’t carve a nation out of a wild frontier with all the history that entails”? You really should read up about the Maori Wars, just for starters.

  2. avatar cigr says:

    The only way America could be disarmed would be door to door searches and confiscations which would lead to armed insurrection almost immediately. There are too many of us who won’t just surrender our weapons without a fight.

    1. avatar Patrick says:

      Well, if everyone was put in a cage, they could be scanned and searched after returning from state supervised employment or food acquisition to make sure they don’t have any bits of metal.
      Gun control relatively works in prison, maybe not to prevent homicide, but at least to prevent homicide with guns. Given a solitary confinement situation (and assuming one is on a list of those who are to live) one could be relatively “safe”.

      Then again, is a sci-fi like robot overlord operated nightmare continental prison worth a reduction of (un-legislated) “gun crimes”? I’m thinking not.

    2. avatar JAS says:

      They can just wait until you get in your car and go to work, then get in and grab them.

  3. avatar ST says:

    Yes they very well can.

    In fact, I’d say it’s already begun.

    Put down the Mossberg.It’s not gonna happen that way.No SWAT trucks in the wee hours , no flashbangs, no ATF raids.

    The way it’ll go down is like a bad marriage -suffering spread out over time.The idea is to turn up the regs slowly, so that instead of triggering civil disobedience society actually considers the restrictions ” normal”. Eventually, once society considers the previous restrictions normal, the screws get turned a little tighter.

    First is permits.Then , ten round magazines.Then discretionary issue ownership.Then safe storage laws which render home defense with a firearm illegal.At each turn, more time passes, more gun owners die off, and more kids grow up thinking gun ownership is a social disease.

    By the time a total ban is offered, gun control will have become a social cornerstone.The default position of the typical voter will be anti, and the only folks left with legally owned guns will be old crones armed with grey hair and lots of stories about “the good old days”.

    This has all happened before .If we let it, it will happen again here.

    1. avatar Pseb says:

      The incremental approach takes too long and governments change.

      1. avatar ST says:

        Except what were talking about goes beyond government. It’s about social customs.That’s why Eric Holder said back in the 90’s that gun control requires “brainwashing” us.

        At one time, smoking cigarettes used to be customary. People just did it when they saw fit. Now, entire cities have banned the practice. What changed? Social perception of smoking went from something socially acceptable to something socially forbidden.

        Government, ultimately ,responds to the will of the people.And “the people” respond to social custom.

        We can see this process already. Observe the New York State tourist who was physically ill at the sight of an AR15 in her rental car.That reaction isn’t logical, since science says the car was a bigger threat to public safety then the gun was.

        No, she reacted that way because hating guns is a default social custom in New York.What happened there can happen nationwide.All it takes is time, and a sleeping minority of gun owners who think the antis are all about laws and legislation.

        1. avatar styrgwillidar says:

          Yep. You’ve heard the old adage about how to boil a frog. It will be incremental, as in CA more and more onerous regulations a drip at a time. Restrictions on ammunition, micro-stamping, insurance, increased fees/taxes for various gun related activities, environmental regulations on outdoor AND indoor ranges (smoke as well as lead), zoning restrictions.

          At the same time more and more social indoctrination via schools, public ‘safety’ programs and grants, restrictions on government assistance tied to firearm questionaires, PSA ad campaigns with celebrities, anti-gun messages embedded in movies/TV shows, requiring medical exams to collect firearm information (or void insurance/public assistance/etc.)

          All of this may not even be intentional/planned to disarm america. Much of it will be done simply for appearances sake- for politicians to be able to say they did something (even though that something won’t have the positive affect they’ll justify it with).

          And finally – the Peter Principle as applied to large bureaucracies like our state and federal government. The tendency to make rules and regulations whether they are necessary or not because, well because that’s their job as mid-level flunkies. To come up with rules. If they don’t, they feel lazy, like they’re not doing anything, because all they can produce is rules. It’s the way to get noticed, promoted, and give the appearance of productivity. So, ATF, DoJ, state DoJs etc. will continue to generate rules even without a specific political motivation.

        2. avatar Red Sox says:

          ST – Spot on!

        3. avatar SomeGuyInNC says:

          This is exactly the point of “zero tolerance” gun policies in public schools, conditions kids so that any contact with guns (be they fingers, pop-tarts, folded paper or pen drawings) evokes fear of punishment. Hammer it into them from kindergarten till high school / college graduation, and you will have a generations of voters that will happily hand them over to the first politician that asks them to give them up for “public safety” reasons.

      2. avatar A samurai says:

        I used to feel that way. I used to believe in the system. I used to believe there was balance.

        Tell me. When was the last time our government CHANGED? Do some research into the big players in our government. You will start hearing the same last names repeated over and over, and not many of them either. Bush, Kennedy, Clinton, Rumsfeld, Fienstien, Warren, Brady, when was the last time you didn’t hear those names. And that’s just what I could think of off the top of my head.

        Our government is SUPPOSED to change. But president after president serve 2 consecutive terms. The longest serving senator has been in office 51 years! How long enough to brainwash people? 8, 10 (a standard generation), 51? When was the last time our government changed? When was the last time someone was elected to federal office that wasn’t a Dem or Rep?
        Look around. Bans in NY, CT, and CA. The term “common sense gun control” used as the standard in the media to make all gun owners look like extremists. The incremental approach is happening right now.

      3. avatar Roscoe says:

        @ Pseb
        It’s been happening incrementally, ‘socially’ for a long time with decades of conditioning of our children in schools and the devious brainwashing/reeducation of the uninformed populace by the anti-gun media. Government continues to make small incursions into 2A protections every day and will achieve success where ever the public has been reconditioned to believe and accepts that infringement and confiscation is necessary, whether it be by outright taking, or grandfathered taking through restricting transfers to heirs – the more likely avenue.

        Every political period where there is progressive, statist liberalism at the helm of government – local, state or federal – these antis’ confiscatory efforts gain traction. The larger ‘general public’ has been and continues to be conditioned through education, reeducation, and media propaganda to expect them, and will accept them as a given, even if we don’t.

        We aging gunners are all a dying breed, and as time passes, the newer generations won’t immediately have the historical perspective, experiences, knowledge and insightfulness that have given us impetus to resist the antis with the dedication and commitment we possess. Some may, on faith, my son among them. But our numbers will naturally recede unless the people of the gun ’tribe’ is strongly reinforced and the 2nd Amendment, pro self-defense heritage passed on without being way-laid by the false detour being engineered by the antis’ and statists within and outside of government.

        I agree with ST; don’t want to see it, don’t want to believe it, but I’ve come to expect ‘taking’ as inevitable without a serious eye opening turnaround of the current propaganda and rhetoric being consumed and internalized by the ‘general public’.

    2. avatar Calvin says:

      I think history shows us this is how it almost did happen. The 1960s pushed gun rights way back but we’ve been slowly regaining them. What if instead of 1960 being the low point of gun rights it was only the beginning? Let the 1968 GCA be a lesson to us: NOT ONE STEP BACK.

      For what it’s worth, I think we did absorb that lesson. In the gun community I think there is much less willingness to compromise than there used to be.

      1. avatar A samurai says:

        NOT ONE STEP BACK!

    3. avatar A samurai says:

      Like boiling a proverbial Frog.
      The proverb goes:
      If you try to put a frog in a pot of boiling water it will jump out.
      But…
      If you put the frog in the pot of water cold, and turn on the stove, it will sit in the water until it boils alive.

      Drastic changes are intolerable. Small changes are unnoticeable.

      After all think about how much the pot is boiling now? My generation is unaware that within my grandmother’s lifetime, you could clip an add out of a magazine, send in $35, and have a Thompson short barreled SMG delivered to your home. That was the 1930. They ARE disarming us. Right now. They do fear us. Right Now. They do think they are better then us. Right Now. This video was presented as a hypothetical but it is exactly what is happening right now. I grew up in WDC. I remember when people could play Frisbee on the capital lawn. Today? The Capital building lawn is lined with 3 fences (2 of chain link one of concrete barricades) posted with signs that say you will be attacked by dogs if you cross them. It looks like a police state. Our government has run away with itself and it is populated only by political dynasties that have been “our representatives” for generation after generation. All politicians today believe they are a breed apart. And why not? They have all the money. Some days I wonder why the people don’t already take to the streets. How much more does it take? How many lines have to be crossed and how many rights have to be taken before it becomes wrong?

      They are betraying the very principles this Nation was founded on. It is an attack upon its very soul.

      1. avatar Roscoe says:

        An American Spring?

        Unlikely; way too many ‘sheeple’.

    4. avatar Jonathan - Houston says:

      No. Even gradual encroachment doesn’t exist in a vacuum. At some point, that which we need firearms for in the first place, will run so rampant that Americans, including those who never thought to own a firearm, would turn out in droves to procure one and protest their illegality.

      This isn’t Sweden. The demographics and economics here make perpetual tension between people the permanent normal. Disarm the law abiding, and you’ll replace an uneasy equillibrium of occasional deadly violence, with an abject avalanche of wholesale slaughter.

      The anti’s feral fantasies of “blood in the streets” could well come to pass as thugs go wilding and an underarmed public pleads hopelessly helplessly to an overwhelmed government.

      1. avatar Roscoe says:

        Criminal anarchy organized by those with nothing to lose and everything to gain? I’ve thought that too. We’ve seen enough riots over the years to know it’s possible, and with social media communication capabilities, who knows.

    5. avatar Jack says:

      You nailed it, ST. This is exactly the approach that the gun prohibitionists are taking–slow, steady, and unspectacular. That’s why they’ll vote for every new regulation, even if they know that it won’t prevent crime and is simply an infringement.

    6. avatar Ing says:

      The solution, then, is for people who see the truth about guns to have children and teach them well. You never know how things might turn out (kids grow up and have minds of their own), but I’m trying.

    7. avatar Mack Bolan says:

      I think the better point here is that America may be disarmed, but Americans will not.

      I picked those words carefully.

      A vast majority of people in the united states, are more European in their values than American. They may be gun owners, but they will voluntarily register, surrender, and otherwise obey the laws that are foisted upon them. They will blindly follow the law, and forfeit their rights along the way.

      Americans will go about their business as usual. They will continue to acquire and keep whatever guns they see fit. Americans believe in the principle of the constitution, and a right is not something subject to restriction.

      People in general need to stop framing the discussion about becoming a criminal, and frame it more around remaining an American.

    8. avatar JAS says:

      Agree but it’s all about generational indoctrination. A few generations later no guns are the norm.

      Except every so often you tend to get a rebellious generation and then all the carefully planned doctrines go in the toilet in just a few years :).

    9. avatar Chuck in IL says:

      ST knows.

  4. avatar RockOnHellChild says:

    “A fair and honest debate in Washington”, he surely doesn’t mean DC, right?

    He has to be talking about a county some where…

    1. avatar Ing says:

      The state, maybe… Although any debate that involves liberal/progressives is going to be a shrieking emotional poopfight regardless of opponent or place.

  5. avatar bobmcd says:

    Even if it were possible somehow to simultaneously confiscate all of the guns in the United States, it would be a matter of days, possibly hours, before the first of many zip guns were made, or foreign guns smuggled in, or police/military weapons stolen.

    See also at least two other English-speaking countries that have tried this.

    ETA: the only time national firearm confiscation was done with any real success was Samurai Japan. http://www.amazon.com/Giving-Up-Gun-Reversion-1543-1879/dp/0879237732

  6. avatar Pseb says:

    The only way American gun-owners could be disarmed would be house to house searches and confiscation which would lead to armed insurrection and probably a military coup d’etat overthrowing the government.

    1. avatar Roscoe says:

      It would be done through coerced voluntary compliance with ‘new’ laws placed on law abiding gun owners who will reluctantly comply so as to stay ‘legal’ and not risk becoming a prohibited person by ignoring the law and being ‘caught’.

      Once the state knows who you are, where you are, what guns you have, your firearms are all at their mercy. Hold outs will be tracked down, or neutralized by old age.

      I’m in CA; I know exactly how it will go down, because I’ve seen legislative proposals aimed at eventual grandfathered confiscation.

  7. avatar peirsonb says:

    “Ultimately, in his view, the responsibility for holding our elected officials accountable for their RKBA infringing tendencies, something that seems to work better in some locales than others.” – Seems to be missing a clause…..

    But the very short answer to the question of the headline is yes, America can be disarmed. It may be a long way off but it is entirely possible. Especially since the opponents to the Constitution are patient and willing to indoctrinate future generations. Eventually there won’t be anyone left that believes in our founding principles. Eventually. For now? Cold dead hands.

    1. avatar Patrick says:

      I too read that text a few times, unsure of what it means. I don’t think it’s a sentence.

  8. avatar Cameron S. says:

    I would die for this cause. I know those are big words, but there is nothing I believe in and stand for more than our natural rights.

    That is, only if it came to that.

    But to answer the prompt in short terms: no. I’m not the only one. That is why.

    1. avatar John says:

      The problem is that new generations won’t feel that way. They aren’t being taught US history any more, and they don’t understand the hows and whys of our existence as a country.

      Unless something is done RIGHT NOW, the country will inevitably be rendered as a socialist state.

      As long as there are more than one person on the planet, this problem will exist. There is no fixing the core problem.

      1. avatar DB says:

        If we get to that, the country won’t go all one way or the other, it’ll break apart. In crude terms, you’ll have something akin to two-four countries more or less along red state/blue state lines, with self-selection and mass migration to the “new” countries that fit your ideological perspective.

        The good news is RKBAers control more territory. The antis really only have the cities For example, NYC is rabidly anti-2A, but once you get more than 50 miles north of the city, you’re in a red state pretty much all the way to the Canadian border and the great lakes going west. To convince upstaters to live in their new “country” they’d have to come up here and conquer us/bribe us or otherwise give us a good alternative. We’d decline, keep our guns, frack the Marcellus shale and charge them an arm and a leg for natgas to stay warm…and have the last laugh.

        1. avatar Roscoe says:

          As long as Dems control the state legislature by virtue of enormous Democrat controlled metropolitan polulations, ain’t gonna happen in places like New York State, or in CA where Dems have an overwhelming majority, if not a supermajority.

      2. avatar Roscoe says:

        Those are my thoughts too, John. Unless this country’s leadership changes course, we appear to be headed the direction you say. Maybe by some miracle the sheeple will wake up and find themselves losing out and vote to shift the political picture, but they really can’t or don’t think intelligently enough to realize they’re being taken by the very politicos who pander to them, so I don’t see change coming soon.

  9. avatar Salty Bear says:

    Ridiculous. Our government already has disarmed us, except for the guns they graciously (read: grudgingly) allow us to have. The passage and enforcement of every gun law (i.e. their refusal to acknowledge the Constitution) already constitutes abandoning the republican principles on which the nation was founded. The fact that anyone in America obeys any gun law is pretty solid evidence that enough of us will obey any gun law that the government passes.

    P.S. This is why I can’t stand the term “law-abiding citizen.” POTG use it constantly to argue that they shouldn’t be disarmed, but they don’t realize that the government is counting on them to be “law-abiding” while completely ignoring the laws which constrain its powers.

    1. avatar Anmut says:

      ^^This. Simply “allowing” us to own modern sporting rifles with proper background checks and taxes while the police and military own real assault weapons has already disarmed us.

      They have the upper hand in weaponry, and we gave it to them peacefully.

      1. avatar Chris Mallory says:

        We out number them by a large margin.

    2. avatar DB says:

      Yes, but there is a line over which the government is no longer perceived as legitimate and the “disarming” that has heretofore taken place will reverse itself. Let’s say that line is martial law or federal troops called in somewhere to put down legitimate protests. Do you not think that all manner of high octane black rifles won’t start flooding into willing hands, the restrictions be damned?

      1. avatar Salty Bear says:

        These lines have already long since been crossed in the U.S. Where was the revolution?

  10. avatar CoolBreeze72 says:

    Can the UK be disarmed? Australia? For all practical purposes, yes, it can happen here.

    1. avatar A-Rod says:

      Your statement proves it cannot happen here. There are plenty of guns in the hands of criminals and the wealth in both England and Australia. Pass those same laws in this counrty and the same thing would happen. Criminals will still have guns. The rich who can afford special privilages and ‘gun clubs’ will own guns. Get a job as a body guard or law enforcement and you can have a gun too.

    2. avatar Ross says:

      They don’t have a 2A

  11. avatar Jay Perez says:

    Another question would be to WHO would disarm Americans…. Police/SWAT teams, Military?? UN troops?? I seriouly doubt a lot of our military guys would go along with that. If the government did try.. that it would be a very dark day in US history and a lot of Congressmen/Senators would go into hiding. There would be Milita groups everywhere, and they would label them terrorism and try to turn the people on them. I would expect a full on attack with them using the MSM as a weapon against citzens.

    1. avatar Jon R. says:

      The U.S. National Guard helped disarm citizens during Hurricane Katrina, I kid not.

    2. avatar DB says:

      The amount of people that will need to be strung up in the town square is vanishingly small. I count somewhere less than 535 in Washington DC, and no more than 2000-3000 in state legislatures where there is no respect for the 2A.

      You will have to have a radically brainwashed large paramilitary force in service to one party hell bent on political power to make it happen. Of course, it’s happened. But the odds are loooooooonnnnngggg here in the US.

      The only road to disarming I see is voluntary, and given how Obama has become the greatest gun salesman the world have ever known, I find the voluntary route implausible for the foreseeable future.

    3. avatar Santander says:

      The numbers of necessary manpower do not bear out the ability to forcibly disarm the population. About 120K federal sworn officers, and about 36K local and state law enforcement, about 1.1 million combined components the Army, (~500K active, ~350K ARNG, and ~200K Reserve). I doubt that you could persuade more than about 50% to go along with unconstitutional orders once it became clear what was happening. All due respect — forget about the Marines and SpecOps — not only too few to worry about at this scale of operation — but that percentage of compliance with unlawful orders would be vastly lower. But even assuming they were “all-in” — and even armed up some of the staff wienies — that amounts to less than 1.5 million to serve for enforcement.

      Compare this to the 20 million veterans in U.S. civilian life — and then look at Fallujah, or the Swat. Then — add in ubiquitous cellphones, full-on datacom encryption, and the tactical and strategic experience, flexibility and depth dwarfs that of the forces of control by several orders of magnitude — and resistance never depends on close command and control.

      In terrorem strategies based on surveillance, isolation and decapitation (see Stasi, NKVD, KGB) are really the only ways to keep control of an incipient revolutionary population on those terms. And those would not go on very long or very far without massive losses of legitimacy, and/or exponential radicalization. That is especially so when the welfare state crumbles in the second stage of that process — the handouts can only keep coming if the society remains marginally economically stable — at that can’t happen in a full-on police state — hasn’t yet, anyway. Deng Xiao Ping had no choice but to liberalize China — that or say good bye to the Party — which is what the true lesson of Tian An Men Square was.

  12. avatar CoolBreeze72 says:

    Salty Bear. How about Natural Law abiding…?

  13. avatar tdiinva says:

    The Russian mob, MS-13 and the drug cartels will be importing weapons within weeks if not days. No, the country cannot be disarmed by law. It can only happen if the citizens decide to do it themselves.

    1. avatar DJ says:

      Pretty sure they’d be selling those guns to other criminals, not average citizens. I don’t know anyone in the Russian mob or MS13 I could go buy a firearm from if the government made it illegal, do you?

      The criminal element can’t be disarmed. Law abiding citizens absolutely can – all it takes is the passage of unconstitutional laws. Which has already happened, has been effective, and continues apace in New York, etc.

      Your great grandfather could walk down to the general store with cash in hand and walk out with a rifle, and the only interaction with the government would be the assessment of sales tax. Can you do that?

      1. avatar tdiinva says:

        The entry point would be crminal enterprises but then I would expect to see “shooteasies” appear where private ciitizens in the know and with cash could purchase firearms.

    2. avatar dudebro says:

      excellent

  14. avatar Marcus says:

    I think the Jim Crow analogy is a good one. I mean, shit. Look what they’ve done in New York alone. Unless you’re wealthy and connected, you’re not going to be allowed to carry a gun, so why bother? You have to worry about magazine limits and background checks and crazy laws that seem to be evolving by the day. True, there are people still demanding their rights, but you have to wonder how many others have just given up on their 2A rights. If it was just NY, that would be dandy. Wall them off and drive around them. As it is, some others states seem to be looking at NY as the model. It’s just friggin nuts.

  15. avatar Andrew Hammond says:

    Nope. Even if they somehow round up all the guns from honest citizens AND all the criminals, the military and National Guard will keep their guns. So will the cops and the SWAT teams. So will the the FBI, the CIA, the NSA. There will also be a system of waivers and permits and taxes and exemptions that let the banks and the billionaires and the VIPs have all the armed escorts they want.

    Disarmament will always be a question of who is allowed access to firearms vs. who isn’t. And the “universal” scenario means that (1) the rich, connected, important people remain armed, while (2) ordinary folks will be criminalized if they try to operate at the same level as the elite classes.

    So this is really a non-starter.

  16. avatar Accur81 says:

    The sad thing is, I think America can be disarmed. We, as a nation, were dumb enough to elect Obama. Twice. Feinstein is serving a life sentence in the senate. Public schools throughout the nation panic at pop tarts shaped like guns, shut down if a live round is discovered, and offer an open invitation to the spree killer as a posted gun free zone. The Arms Trade Treaty has been signed, Obama has passed executive orders banning the importation of military surplus, and the United Nation stands the twisted revolver as their symbol.

    Imagine amnesty creating a whole new wave of voters who will decimate rights in exchange for government handouts. The civilian disarmament crowd is merrily pushing the envelope whilst reading our emails. Electronic nannies patrol the skies, scan our computers, track your search histories, and delve into our tax deductions. Citites of idiots overwhelm informed voters. The truth is hidden, and political speeches with empty promises get cheerful reception. TTAG itself could be shut down as a “terrorist” organization. The rest of free speech would soon follow. Guns are deemed a public health threat by a government who took over healthcare.

    If the disarmers are wise enough to take the slow approach, they will tax, confiscate, and regulate everything we own until their is nothing left that does not belong to the State.

    1. avatar Marcus says:

      Gah! That’s grim. Orwellian. Nicely stated. I’m off to hug my guns.

      1. avatar Red Sox says:

        Marcus, by Orwellian do you mean?

        “…… of draconian control by propaganda, surveillance, misinformation, denial of truth, and manipulation of the past”.
        “The term is often used in reference to the NSA’s controversial surveillance programs”.

        1. avatar Herb says:

          “Orwellian” usually refers not to the totalitarian police state described in “1984”, but rather to the twisting of the language that makes it possible. “Thoughtcrime” is Orwellian; “doublethink” is Orwellian; so is naming the secret police headquarters the “Ministry of Love”.

          Likewise, “common sense gun laws” is Orwellian; so is “universal background checks” and “military style assault weapons” (easily expandable into “long range sniper weapons”). These are Orwellian usages.

          Come to think of it, “If you like your health care plan, you can keep your heaqlth care plan. Period.” is extremely Orwellian.

        2. avatar Accur81 says:

          @Herb

          That, sir, is an excellent allusion explanation.

        3. avatar Ing says:

          The genesis of the term is in Orwell’s seminal essay, “Politics and the English Language” (well, that and the bleak vision of 1984). It’s one of those things everyone should read: https://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/orwell46.htm

    2. avatar Greg in Allston says:

      You’re a cheery one today. Despite all of what you said, and I agree with every last word, I still don’t think that We the People can ever be disarmed. At least for the next several decades there will remain a significant minority of armed, knowledgable and freedom loving citizens that won’t let it happen. Sure, the decades long cultural psyop that the left has been running in the US and the West has paid them some dividends, but I firmly believe that the long game is ours.

      1. avatar Accur81 says:

        I hope you’re right.

  17. avatar jwm says:

    We were well on our way to disarming ourselves when the 68 gca jolted us awake. Followed by the 94 awb.

    We were changing from a rural country to a city country. When i was a kid people had shotguns, rimfires and hunting rifles. Pretty fudd like as a nation. Military arms in citizens hands were usually trophies from the ww2 era and a lot of these had been converted to sporters. handguns were much the same. Rimfires, revolvers and most of the autos I saw as a kid were bringbacks from ww2. You’d have the uncle that had a luger with 1 mag and a half box of fmj’s.

    We were well on our way to being a parody of England. A few sporting arms and not much else. 1968, the crack epidemic of the 80’s and the awb woke us up.

  18. avatar ToddR says:

    This guy is wearing rose-colored glasses. Think of instances where aspects of the Constitution are disregarded (ex $20 clause of 7th Amendment) or amendments which reverse other amendments (prohibition). History is filled with examples of civil liberties being de facto and de jure eliminated. Sadly, self-armament is no exception.

  19. avatar CoolBreeze72 says:

    “…and the only folks left with legally owned guns will be old crones armed with grey hair and lots of stories about “the good old days”. I saw this on the Grammy award show. Willy Nelson, Kristofferson, and Haggard performed and the outlaws were obviously not relevant to today’s crowd. Sad. Made me feel old.

  20. avatar Javier says:

    I agree with his argument in the near to mid future. A comprehensive move for civilian disarmament is extremely unlikely to succeed in my lifetime. Apres moi, le deluge.

  21. avatar PeterK says:

    Has any country been effectively civilly disarmed? UK? Nope. Australia? Nope. Mexico? Nope.

    I don’t think we could. I mean in theory anything is possible, yes. But practically speaking? I don’t see it.

  22. avatar Anmut says:

    Can we be disarmed? We already have. When the government and gestapo police forces are allowed more powerful weapons than the voting citizen can partake in, then yes. We have already been disarmed.

  23. avatar Soccerchainsaw says:

    “Can America be disarmed?”
    Never say never. I would never have thought that the Aussies would take such measures so nearly universally, having seen Crocodile Dundee and all…

    That being said, without some major incident, we appear to be gaining ground in the right direction. It’s possible even with a major incident that it will now be interpreted by the majority as being proof that more guns not less guns are the answer to the problem.

  24. avatar CoolBreeze72 says:

    Man is always in a constant struggle to retain his rights. Left unchecked, he will lose to the usurpers. Even a great document like the constitution is no guarantee. It is only a piece of paper if it isn’t fought for. The efforts required in defense are dictated by the level of attack somewhat. Given that, man should always be on offense to gain the advantage.

    1. avatar Accur81 says:

      That’s exactly right. Gun laws don’t stop bad guys, and the Constitution alone doesn’t stop bad laws or bad politicians.

    2. avatar Old Ben turning in grave says:

      I fear that the price of liberty is the same as it has always been. I hope I’m wrong.

  25. avatar Pedro Of NYC says:

    If we fail to understand history because history always, always repeats itself. We who come to this website are high information voters. If we study the modus operandi of our adversaries (commie/libs) & we are on top of their methods. The chances of this country being disarmed is low but if we give them an inch they will take a mile. If they can’t get straight out disarmament they will go for making the process of getting guns more & more difficult, eg California microstamping & the process of getting a handgun within the 5 boros of NYC. Here in NYC we need to repeal the Sullivan Act of 1911.

  26. avatar Anmut says:

    A right unexercised is a right lost. Carry on!

  27. avatar dudebro says:

    it would require multiple, large scale massacres. that is what worked in Australia.

    but I dont think it would be as easy. we have NRA, GOA, ETC.; strong population of hunters and veterans; and a constitution built on fighting tyrrany. guns are too embedded in our history and culture.

    what the feinswines and the cumhos do in their little feifdoms is irrelevant

  28. avatar Tom in Oregon says:

    My cup is always half full.

    Not going to happen. Ever.

    1. avatar 505markf says:

      Agreed. Though another way to look at your cup is that it is twice as large as it needs to be. 😉

      1. avatar Mack Bolan says:

        That’s why real men wear kilts.

        http://www.pinterest.com/pin/75787206199724202/

  29. avatar Phil says:

    Yes, we can be disarmed. Any student of history can point to multiple examples.

  30. avatar BTinAfghan says:

    What do you really think is behind the over-reaction to all the gun related issues. School lockdowns are a way to condition children to fear guns to the point they will never want to own one. once you have two generations where the people are so ungodly afraid of guns, disarmament will be easy.

  31. avatar CoolBreeze72 says:

    “while the police and military own real assault weapons has already disarmed us.”. This is why we should not have a standing army in our midst. Armies must be formed from free citizens to wage terrible and swift war to vanquish the foe then disband to pursue life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

  32. avatar Ross says:

    Every member of congress knows what the Second Amendment is really all about, they know what it allows We the People to do to them should they try to disarm us. That being said they will continue to try until We the People punish them for their Treason.

    1. avatar Old Ben turning in grave says:

      Human nature. Most people will strive to obtain more power, and they won’t stop until external forces act on them.

  33. avatar Evan says:

    COMPLETE disarmament can’t be done. However, disarm the majority and demonize the minority that is left and the effect is basically the same.

  34. avatar Michael B. says:

    If you believe this is going to happen then you better be active in the fight against the antis. Fight them tooth and nail. Donate money to gun rights organizations, TEACH A YOUNG PERSON TO SHOOT, and educate them on the Constitution, our rights and American history.

    As long as we keep respect for the constitution and our national history alive in the minds and hearts of even a vociferous minority of Americans, we will never be disarmed.

    If we give in to defeatism, we will be. The situation is not as bleak as you’d think.

  35. avatar Jonathan - Houston says:

    This government couldn’t even disarm Afganistan, let alone Iraq. How’s the Syria disarmament campaign going? Hell, we’re actually arming them. Their odds in America don’t look too good.

  36. avatar raincrow says:

    A corrupt government can and will if the citizens let them, a hidden or buried firearm is useless.When the time comes it’s either use it or lose it.Our government is a republic not a democracy we are ruled by law [Constitution] not a majority.

    1. avatar Jack in MT says:

      This. If you think it’s time to bury your guns, it’s actually time to dig them up.

  37. avatar Tom W. says:

    Hence the III Percent. If 97% of the armed country slowly goes down the road to being disarmed, so be it.

    It won’t be me, or my son, or his son, etc,…
    And I think a lot of folks agree. I am having a Mr. Heston flashback.

  38. avatar Dustin Eward says:

    This is the very basis of my current and future products. No one can ban air… Mehtamphetamine is monumentally more dofficult to manufacture. The materials nearly impossible to obtain. But, it’s everywhere. Guns are many orders of magnitude simpler, the materials are everywhere.

    This is the root irresponsibility of anti-gun people. They are so exceptionally detached from reality that they have no idea where all their free stuff comes from or how it is made. They believe they can keep pushing theie extreme irresponsibility agenda because they are so amazingly irresponsible that they haven’t even bothered to find out where their free stuff comes from. If they understood anything about the real world, they would know that the level of industrialization needed to shoulder the burden that they are, is far, far, far higher than the much lower level needed to make guns. If anti-gun people are able to exist and live at all, then the society they find themselves mooching off of is already so far advanced that guns are an extrtemely easy to manufacture afterthought. The only way to accomplish their idiotic pipe-dreams is to send us all back to the stone age and live in caves. Which, coincidentally, is precisely what their complete detachment from understanding any fiscal concept will also cause. They’re just plain fantastically clueless and irresponsible in every way. IT’s a plan that will work, no doubt, but they don’t seem to realize that the goal is the opposite of what they htink it is… Because they’re so damn clueless.

  39. avatar Gary says:

    The first time you use an acronym in prose, you should spell it out followed by the acronym in parentheses. What is RKBA?

    1. avatar TC says:

      Right to Keep and Bear Arms

  40. avatar TC says:

    They can have them when I run out of ammo.

    1. avatar 505markf says:

      Don’t be such a defeatist… buy some bayonets. 😉

      1. avatar jwm says:

        My m44 and sks came with permanently mounted bayonets. Put a bayonet on a 91-30 and you can stab the guy 2 blocks over.

  41. avatar Dustin Eward says:

    LEARN HOW TO MAKE GUNS! They can’t take the knowledge out of your head. GUNS ARE NOT THAT HARD TO MAKE. That’s why criminals will always have them. A gun need not be fancy to do it’s job. Cut the fancy crap that we find in the guns we buy, and you can make them in your garage with minimal tools and materials you find every day.

    No need to stash what you can make. No need to hide what you haven’t made yet…

    1. avatar Jeff says:

      I have built enough AKs that I’m reasonably confident that I could build one with basic tools, sheet steel and bar stock, a spot welder, a scrolling drill press with a good selection of drill bits and end milling bits, and enough time. The operating principals and mechanical blueprints are basically etched in my memory. The rifled barrel is the only real hard part – so maybe I’ll just make garage-made Saiga-12s.

      I’m sure the same goes for many people who work on various other types of guns, who have worked on them so many times that they could draw an engineering blueprint from memory if they had to.

      No amount of laws and restrictions can ever stop a determined person with rudimentary machinist and shop skills from building a functional firearm, even a gas-operated semi-auto rifle or shotgun.

  42. avatar Mediocrates says:

    every fantasy judicial ruling by the Federal courts is one small step closer to disarmament.

  43. avatar Dave s says:

    dont think offering the masses more welfare benefits will last much longer
    the problem is someone has to be earning enough to pay taxes to give it away.

    Think the limit is coming to that train.

    they cannot disarm us all so long as there is plentiful public lands to cache forbidden property for future retrieval. Though i think a contemporary uprising might be more beneficial to the Constitution, rather then suffer for long without rights as serfs to the elite.

  44. avatar Mitchell! says:

    Relax, guys. I have the doomsday plan.

    1. Run for local sheriff.
    2. Deputize everyone over 18 in your county.
    3. Tell President Hillary (or Bloomberg or Christie) to get bent.

    This will become common very soon.

  45. avatar Renegade Dave says:

    I wish that Billy made more videos.

  46. avatar DS says:

    “Men fight for liberty and win it with hard knocks. Their children, brought up easy, let it slip away again, poor fools. And their grandchildren are once more slaves.”

    D.H. Lawrence

  47. avatar ray says:

    I think despite our governments current status, we wont see disarmament in our life time. For every one person that will back away from thier oath to support and defend the constitution, there are many more who will stand by that oath

  48. avatar Jonathan - Houston says:

    There are some parallels with smoking, particularly in the anti’s attempts not simply to persuade, but to demonize, smokers and firearms owners alike. However, the analogy shouldn’t be stretched too far.

    For starters, it takes a really long time to die from smoking. When smoking was at its peak in the 1940’s and 1950’s, American life expectancies were only in the 60’s or so. For minorities and lower income whites, two groups with higher than average rates of smoking, life expectancy was even lower. With economic growth came better nutrition and health care, which combined to raise life expectancies.

    Once people were living longer, now they started dying from diseases like smoking-related illnesses that took decades to get you. Now smoking became something to avoid, not necessarily because it was socially unacceptable, but because dying from it became relevant. (I suspect divorce rates took off, too, once “’till death do us part” started meaning a helluva lot longer than it used to!)

    More tellingly, despite decades of steady declines in adult smoking rates, it’s been stuck at 20% of adults for the last decade; suggesting there are die hard smokers who won’t give up regardless. If 20% of adult American firearm owners are similarly die hard, then this could get real serious real fast.

    1. avatar AmericanSpirit says:

      Dear Grabbers,

      Please excuse us folks with guns and a love of history while we continue to revere our natural rights. You’ll thank us sometime if we ever need to fight to Live Free or Die Hard

      1. avatar 505markf says:

        Good point. I think every serious gun owner should stockpile 5 Mosins and 2,500 rounds of 7.62x54R for arming one’s neighbors (at least the trustworthy ones) if SHTF. Just a thought…

        1. avatar jwm says:

          Break action single shot shotguns. A newb can be taught one in 5 minutes. Unbreakable and multi purpose. First hit probability with a shotgun is much higher than with a rifle or handgun.

        2. avatar AmericanSpirit says:

          With an up-front investment of $1000 or so, for those who can afford it that’s really not a bad idea. At least as long as those 500rd surplus tins are cheap, anyway.

          Now, do you leave those rifles in stock form, complete with metal buttplate for squishing skulls of enemy of motherland, or do you trick ’em out to be precision shooters?

        3. avatar jwm says:

          AS, no need for precision shooters. You’re giving these rifles to people that don’t have their own. Chances are pretty good they won’t be able to get the most out of precicsion shooters anyway. Reliable and murphy proof are probably more needed at that point.

  49. avatar cubby123 says:

    Ahhh Yaaa, good luck with that.

  50. avatar Jim R says:

    They’ll sure as hell try, and keep trying until they do it.

    1. avatar cubby123 says:

      They will never do it,but they will keep trying and we will keep kicking their asses.

  51. avatar MWorrell says:

    They may not disarm the people, but they can raise the bar of ownership high enough that the numbers of gun owners shrinks drastically.

  52. avatar Randy Drescher says:

    Well, o has taken on the Little Sisters of the Poor. If there is anything left after they are done kicking his ass we should be able to put the rest in the trash heap. This old atheist watched a&e take on god & I might have seen something more painfull, I can’t remember when though. Pardon me, I’m off to join the religious order of gun toters, Randy

  53. avatar bbguns says:

    It depends on what is meant by ‘disarming’ America. If you mean complete lack of public gun ownership, I don’t think so. As many have pointed out, look at the UK and Australia…gun bans galore but still plenty of guns in circulation.
    If, on the other hand, ‘disarming America’ means the end of legal gun ownership, rest assured that there are plenty of statist politicians who have that ultimate goal and will continue to work toward achieving it well into the future.
    Consider history…we have the NFA, GCA, FOPA, AWB, a bunch of executive orders, and too many state houses enacting legislation that violates ‘shall not be infringed.’ None of these government acts do anything to buttress the second amendment. Look at what they are doing every day. The media keeps reporting gun violence as if it’s a new epidemic, despite every credible study showing that gun crime is down by nearly 50% over the last 20 years. Keep beating the anti-gun drum long enough and you might get enough people to believe what they say. Remember, to many Americans, the issue of gun control is a non-issue. They simply don’t really care and are easily swayed by fork-tongued politicians and network talking heads. Their influence even extends to those of us who are gun owners. How many pro-2A people have you heard continue to use the term ‘assault weapon’ when referring to a semi-automatic rifle? How many times have you heard pro-2A people use the term ‘high-capacity magazine’ when referring to the normal block 19 mag? How many times have you heard supporters of the US Constitution refer to the 2A as ‘granting the right to keep and bear arms’ when we should be stating that it simply reaffirms a natural right?
    This issue truly is the frog in the pot. For the past 80+ years, we’ve seen slow but steady infringement on the 2A. Sometimes we are able to push back, but it seems we are more often giving ground.
    The anti-2A crowd will continue to use terms like ‘assault weapons,’ ‘weapons of war,’ automatic weapons, high-capacity magazines, legitimate gun owners, legitimate hunters, epidemic of gun violence, NRA extremist…you get the picture. What happens when the next Newtown occurs? Will it be enough to sway opinion? Maybe, maybe not. But rest assured, they will do their best to exploit the next tragedy. They will start with a new AWB. Then on to magazine size. Then maybe caliber or ammunition. Then any semi-automatic weapon, etc.
    So…do I think America will be disarmed? As long as there are enough students of history, supporters of the Constitution, and those willing to stand up, it’s unlikely. But we relax our vigilance and give them an opening (i.e. ‘compromise’ or ‘common sense’ laws), we risk losing everything on the slippery slope…

  54. avatar DerryM says:

    I don’t think the Liberal Socialists have the stomach for mandatory seizure of guns from private ownership. I do, however, suspect this anti-gun wussification of our school children might have the eventual aim of getting them, as adults, to voluntarily surrender “the old man’s guns”. This probably won’t happen for ten to fifteen years, and will happen largely in the so-called “Blue States”. “Red States” would have to figure out what to do at the time, but it probably won’t be a mandate, jsu an “Uncle Sugar” if you want to be a good citizen Government Program.

    Whatever we do in the 2014 and 2016 National Elections will. I believe, determine the course of the country. Leave the Commies in charge of the Senate and let them gain a Majority in the House and you might as well melt your guns down and sell them for scrap. Give the Republicans, Libertarians and Tea Party control of Congress in 2014 and elect a Libertarian or Conservative Republican President in 2016 and we might be able to save The Republic and restore it to rightful order.

    Insofar as the comment objecting to the term “law-abiding citizen”…I get your point, but when I use it, I do so in preference to something like “non-criminal citizen”…I am not committing crimes and obey gun laws as grudgingly as I pay my Taxes. Give me a better catch phrase and I will consider using it.

  55. avatar Tommy Knocker says:

    Silly rabbit, that boy. Of course it can be disarmed. Don’t know if you saw the update on the Maryland case where the driver was pulled over cause he had a Florida CCW. Well more is now known. Turns out that the little crappy state of Maryland is working with Homeland Security and building a NATIONAL GUN REGISTRY. Yes indeedy. Can it be disarmed, a resounding YES to that. Oh and YOU ARE GOING TO PAY FOR IT WITH YOUR TAXES.

    http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2014/01/16/driving-through-maryland-how-the-lawful-florida-gun-owner-was-targeted-hint-maryland-coordination-and-analysis-center/

    1. avatar AmericanSpirit says:

      I did see that update, but currently that’s a limited case of ridiculous police indiscretion. I’m not sure what the consensus was on how the officer(s) involved got the information on his firearms – presumably via a DHS database given the transportation aspect of the intervening agency – but that was an over-zealous officer being a prick, not a current (or near future) attempt to disarm the whole country.

      I said ‘nope’ because, quite simply, the numbers don’t hold up. What kind of infrastructure would have to be in place to meaningfully accomplished, meant as significant majority (75% or more) seized the confiscation of some 220+ million firearms (without open revolt, anyway)?

      Perhaps the idea of slow, scripted change in our society is more likely, but I’d guess that America’s overall culture of general apathy towards government only lasts until things aren’t quite so good anymore; indeed possible (probability notwithstanding) in the future with the current slow squeeze currently inherent in the system on the middle class.

      I think either way you’re never, ever going to get all those firearms.

      They might try.
      They will fail.

  56. avatar UcsbKevin says:

    I would like to believe that the majority of our law enforcement and military would be unwilling to obey unconstitutional orders, and that therefore it couldn’t happen. Who knows though

    1. avatar DJ says:

      I’d like to think that, too. But see “Hurricane Katrina.” The National Guard conducted warrantless house to house searches to seize weapons. Also, despite all the tough talk, the residents did not use force to resist. When push comes to shove, most people will hand their weapons over.

      Once martial law has been declared an order to confiscate weapons will be enforced as a legal order under the UCMJ. This would be done under the guise of helping the government preserve law and order.

      1. avatar Jonathan - Houston says:

        How many hurricanes do you think will conspire with the government to provide a pretext of exigent circumstances? It’s one thing to round up guns locally after a natural disaster. It’s quite another to do so across the board just because.

    2. avatar DJ says:

      Here’s the relevant Army FM, FM 3-19 Civil Disturbance Operations.

      https://www.fas.org/irp/doddir/army/fm3-19-15.pdf

      See B-43 CONSTITUTIONAL EXCEPTIONS TO THE POSSE COMITATUS ACT

  57. avatar I'm confused says:

    Well, disarmament has begun . . . . . NY, CT, MASS, ETC. Next step is medical marijuana users, then anyone taking scrips for mind altering drugs, then any scripts (based on who knows when any script adversely affects someone’s mind?), continue with vets (first PTSD, then vets of recent wars, then any vet). That is a pretty good start. Then beer drinkers. How about someone with an empty shell casing in their car in Wash, DC?
    Do you all really think any one who posts here is not on NSA’s list or Homeland Security? Round up the names of purchasers of firearms from FFL’s and the names of anyone who visits a gun range, that is a better start.

    We are headed down that road and most of us are sheep. Divide and conquer. Smart electric meters will allow them to turn off your power, etc

    Oh crap, I forgot my tin foil hat! and I am not joking!

  58. avatar Salvatore says:

    It can only be done if we let it be done. Speak of preserving the 2nd amendment and you get treated like an anarchist. Yet, the political leaders that defile the constitution are not held accountable. Our founders stood up to the greatest empire on earth, the shooting started when the Brits attempted to seize a stash of arms. I think we need to make it clear that many thousands of Americans are willing to carry on such tradition. Should loyalty lay with the constitution, or will Americans choose to bow down before the whims of a particular administration? We may find out in the future.

  59. avatar Zach says:

    LMAO!

    The guy in the NRA vid is a fool, and the replies on this topic demonstrate just how EASY complete disarmament will be.

    It’s already been done in many countries in Europe. THE TRICK IS YOU DON’T OUTLAW GUN OWNERSHIP. You just make it an IMPOSSIBLE HASSLE to own a gun.

    Laws have been slowly put into place in other countries:

    – Limit the amount of ammo purchases you can make (usually 50 rounds/year)
    – Limit the number of guns you can own
    – Require mountains of paperwork to own a gun
    – Require difficult methods of storing or transporting a gun.
    – Require statement of need for gun ownership – and no one’s statement of need is ever enough need.
    – Require multiple regulations regarding magazines, barrels, triggers, safetys, serial numbers, etc. that make most firearms impossible to own.

    You just make it very difficult to the point of nearly impossible to own a gun. It WILL happen here.

  60. avatar Chuck in IL says:

    It sure as hell can, because it sure as hell has. Total and complete disarmament is not possible, there will always be the unaccounted for gun, zip guns and things like that. But all you have to see is people in CT lined up to register their guns, then you should know most people would give up their guns without firing a shot.

  61. avatar Gunr, from Oregon says:

    I see a different way to keep America from being disarmed. The main reason politicians want our guns, is because there is way too much crime. When people see their children gunned down with an AR-15, they don’t look at who’s doing it, they look at WHAT’S doing it, which is the gun. Irresponsible, but still a fact!
    Until we get really tough on crime, nothing much is going to change the way the lawmakers think.
    There isn’t room for me to list all the ways to get tough on crime. Instead, I’ll just start with saying criminals that comment serious crime should be put away for life! No more repeat offenders. One more thing, A person committing rape in a violent situation, such as a home invasion, should have his “Johnson” removed, preferably with a dull knife used by the victim!

  62. avatar Mad Max says:

    Even if we voluntarily disarmed, it woul take a few generations to locate all of our guns.:)

  63. avatar Will says:

    I don’t think that Government will see the need to disarm the country because from what I read the country is disarming itself. There are more guns being sold to fewer people, they say. I think there are many people that cannot envision people with civilian weapons taking on the police state or the militarized state. If that is not a certain loss, what would that look like? If the public cannot imagine the people prevailing against an unjust governmen, they may not see the benefit in protecting their gun rights.
    Without the solid Black and Hispanic votes, Obama would not be in office. Those are the people who experience the majority of breakins, muggings, gang activity, narcotics dealing, assaults and thefts. Those are the one who are afraid to go out at night in their neighbirhoods. This does not mean that others are not the victims of crime but bad areas are called bad areas because they are bad areas. The argument that your neighborhood will be safer if law abiding people have guns, and that the crime will be reduced if their are weapons in law abiding people with guns is a strong argument. It is counterbalanced by arguements that more guns will cause more killing, and that if the police see a minority with a gun, they will shoot first and ask questions later. They also think that White gun owners do not want them to have guns. A grass roots efforts by the NRA, other organizations, and the gun companies could go a long way toward changing a solid block of voters for the gun controllers into voters who understand that the Second Ammendment is there to protect them and so they will vote accordingly. Again, I think America will only be disarmed if we continue to disarm ourselves.

  64. avatar Tom says:

    Ok, I’ll be honest and say that I haven’t read every single post here, so maybe what I’m about to say has already been said. I’ve read a lot about the ‘frog in a pot’ analogy here and I won’t deny that it’s true to some degree. So how do we defeat this threat to the future of our children’s freedoms? Teach them the values we hold dear. Teach them that it’s OK to defend themselves. Teach them that while violence is to be avoided, it is also sometimes necessary. Let them see, occasionally, what it is that you have under that vest you wear all the time, and explain to them why it’s there. Take the vest off at home and let them learn that is normal for an adult to carry a defensive weapon. Do that for just a few of our offspring, and they become that agitated and relentless minority that Samuel Adams was talking about. We don’t need to be in the majority (although that would be great), we just need to let the opposition know that we will never back down, will never be intimidated, and will never be subdued.

  65. avatar IdahoPete says:

    Sure. Just depends on how many citizens they are willing to kill and how many gummint stooges they are willing to have killed. The problem they may have is running out of stooges before we run out of armed citizens. The other problem they will have is the number of military veterans and active duty soldiers who take their oath “to protect and defend the Constitution” seriously.

  66. avatar NYJoe says:

    The MSM shows 3 men who were arrested for violating the safe act. Not one of the NY State police ever tried that with me. Katrina flood NGuard hurt and tortured the elderly. Here in Vestal we had the 2006, 2011 floods. Google & Youtube them to compare. NGuard behaved. None of that Mardi Gras shit here. How come I have never been with my wife on CNN, CBS, FOX? First, because the majority of the gun owners are pussies and when you have 10+ men ready to murder you at 3am while you are sound asleep in your boxers, all your blog quotes of Ben Franklin and Thomas Jefferson will be just another show of script kiddie. When they come to my home, you will see Chechnya, Syria, and probably something worse. You know why?? A dog is a man’s best friend. Kick and torture that dog enough times, and at 3am – I promise in JESUS’s precious name my knife will sever the jugular, then I will grab the gun and shoot. And I recieve SSI, food stamps, and medical assistence, I have no car, and I take the liberal bus, and cut out socialist fucking coupons. I have no NRA sticker, but enough fire in my eyes that if you meet me IRL, knowing there are others out there like myself, your question about disarmament is quite apparant. Adveristy makes men, prosperity makes monsters. Less talk, more fucking action. Regards from Upstate NY.

  67. avatar fuckobama says:

    Enough talk about our constitution and our 2nd amendment .we all know what we have to do.how long before Americans say enough and start taking arms .what will spark the revolution .who will be the true enemy is the question …each individual plays a key part in this story .who will you be.a pussy? Or a warrior.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email