Do You Think Gun Hoarding May Lead To Confiscation?

[Mark75H]

I wasn't thinking of shows, I was thinking of retailers ... 4 hour wait at Bass Pro ... how many of these people will lift a finger for their right?

 

[NakedSnowman]

We should remain vigilant, however I doubt any real ban will take place. So horde away, in a few months I'll buy the AR kits and mags I want at a nice discount. Again, we must remain vigilant! Let the powers that be know banning or registration is not an option.

 

[Mark75H]

We should remain vigilant, however I doubt any real ban will take place. So horde away, in a few months I'll buy the AR kits and mags I want at a nice discount. Again, we must remain vigilant! Let the powers that be know banning or registration is not an option.

Nah ... no one will be willing to take a loss ... they'll just keep them under their beds.

 

[Redneck]

This topic has been on my mind a lot lately. Of the 3 ARs that I own (5.56,.300blk,.308) I've probably got 8-10k in them including mags and ammo. Now I think I'm in the mid range, others with 3 might have upwards of 12k while others have under 5k, my point is that's a lot of money for anybody just to piss away. We buy guns for a few reasons, one being an investment. Total confiscation would be flat out stealing even offering us $500 is a big F*** You. I just don't understand how the government can flat out steal something from you that was legally purchased. If they don't see resistance in that well they have another thing coming.

Did they take Ted Kennedy's car? Of course not and he was behind the wheel! Punishing us for something we didn't do should be illegal in itself.

Total confiscation could lead to some real bad things. Things Obama might not be prepared for, a risk he and even O'Malley may not want to take.

I was sitting in the treestand today thinking I cannot wait for Americans to take back America. Would confiscation be the start of that? I guess we will wait and see.

 

[tinydata]

Even if they did try confiscation, it'd be an incredibly stupid idea. How many Americans would be unwilling to surrender their weapons to an un-Constitutional move by Difi and co.? How many police and military would be willing to fire upon fellow citizens refusing to comply with an un-Constitutional law?

I would be extremely concerned with the integrity of the Union of this were to happen.

 

[CrueChief]

It might not be that ugly, they won't come for them some will turn them in happily and willingly( doing their patriotic duty for the children). The rest, well Gov't officials swinging by shooting ranges would get some more. Once that starts happening you couldn't even shoot it with out looking over your shoulder or posting look outs. IDK

 

[hvymax]

I doubt it will come to that.

If it was to come about, though, the first discussion will be "how many is too many", and that would accomplish one of two things... Taking forever to come to that decision, or declaring them all "too many".

The delay could work to our favor, but would not be pretty once decided.

The latter option might result in a level of ugliness that would be distasteful, and push the decision back.

In any case, I think that's a can of worms they don't want to open.

I disagree totally. I think the regime is chomping at the bit to do for us what Stalin,Mao,Pol Pot and Castro did for their people.

 

[Mr H]

I disagree totally. I think the regime is chomping at the bit to do for us what Stalin,Mao,Pol Pot and Castro did for their people.

I don't disagree that they'd LIKE to do it...

The current political climate, and the (to coin a term) pissoffedness of the public, will prevent a wholesale reclamation.

"They" know that GenPop is ready to protect their world. "They" are HOPING they can sway enough softskulls to make a difference.

There is, IMO, no Federal stomach for this. They're just looking to see who'll cave.

Keep those cards and letters coming, my friend...

 

[Tungsten]

I disagree totally. I think the regime is chomping at the bit to do for us what Stalin,Mao,Pol Pot and Castro did for their people.

John Holdren is Obama's Science czar. Holdren thinks overpopulation is a major issue. Obama supports Agenda 21. Disarming the public is typically the first step before a purge.

Go connect the dots.... but Im sure all that is just totally ludicrous.

 

[Mooseman]

If it looks like confiscation is inevitable, we need to plan a Hooligan boating trip on Deep Creek Lake.

 

[BUFF7MM]

If it looks like confiscation is inevitable, we need to plan a Hooligan boating trip on Deep Creek Lake.

Just come to the top of the mountain, that's where I plan to make my stand!!

 

[jessebogan]

Remember, there is no freedom without the freedom to say no. When they demand that Americans "turn in their guns" with or without some token payment, it will be time to say no. If we dont say no now, clearly and unequvocally, we will never again be able to.
Just something to think about.

Jesse in Rockville

 

[Mooseman]

Just come to the top of the mountain, that's where I plan to make my stand!!

I'll be there.

 

[Biggfoot44]

Back at post#13 , depends on how you word the fine print , but but you could make that the NFA .

But were playing into their mindset just by using the word Hoard. We collect , and occasionally invest.

 

[johnnyb2]

Confiscation.....WHAT!! Lets see....buying back 400,000,000 firearms would cost....well....

DAMN..that would bankrupt the country.

OOPPPSSSSssss....WE ARE ALREADY BANBKRUPT!!! :-)

 

[johnnyb2]

Those 2 IDIOTS...Fienstein and Cuomo.....all they need is a WHIFF of bad info and the first things out of their mouth is GUN CONTROL!!!!

I sure wish one of them would get held up, and someone with a CCW would come along and save their ass. Wonder what they would say then!!!!! HA...take that!!!

:-) Ahhh....wishfull thinking!! isnt it great?

 

[Hol3shot]

My buddies and I have talked about this at just about every Xmas party I have attended.

I'd like to see them try and ban or take back the #1 selling firearm in the country. Let alone deal with all of us that have them.

NOT.....

 

[rico903]

No federal gun control law has ever banned the possession of a firearm already legal manufactured/imported and owned. Not one. Ever.

Federal gun control utilizes the interstate commerce approach as a means to skirt any 2A issues.

State laws such as CT and CA allowed for registration of currently held firearms. NY also grandfathered "pre-ban" rifles owned when the law went into effect.

CT allows "post ban" configured firearms (no FH, bayonet lug or threaded bbl). Enumerated "pre-ban" rifles and copies thereof are contraband unless they were registered.

Not exactly true. Many in CA had to dispose of their weapons. There were a flood of internet sales from CA residents selling weapons they could no longer own.

 

[Ab_Normal]

Sure they would like to confiscate a lot of firearms. However, their real purpose behind throwing that out is so they can talk about compromise. The only problem is that the firearms community really only stands to lose more ground by these 'compromises'.

Until the firearms community starts demanding 'free' ammo, more 'free' shooting ranges, 'free' civilian training, 'free' national carry without a permit, etc. then we have nothing to gain in any of the compromises. After all, well regulated in the context of when the BOR was written did mean well trained. I could go on further but you get the point.

I say we stand up for what the constitution deems necessary for a free state and we could truely become the next FSA.

 

[hvymax]

John Holdren is Obama's Science czar. Holdren thinks overpopulation is a major issue. Obama supports Agenda 21. Disarming the public is typically the first step before a purge.

Go connect the dots.... but Im sure all that is just totally ludicrous.

I know. They are all just coincidences and we should never attribute to malice what could be attributed to incompetence. Just like a perfectly incompetent execution of Cloward and Piven's plan to collapse our govt. Just 100 years of incompetent coincidences.