TexasCHLforum.com

Texas Dan Mosby wrote:

LSUTiger wrote:This is the same type of feedback I have received from my ex-military and LEO buddies. I hope what they say is true, that for the most part the LE and Military won't enforce gun confiscation.

First, the military and LEO's follow the orders of those appointed over them, and if the law calls for gun confiscation, then they WILL do as they are ordered and attempt to confiscate guns.

Period.

Second, house to house gun confiscation is simply not practical. While I can see selected areas of any given community being targeted and searched, I don't see this course of action being employed for EVERY home in the nation. I can see them trying to establish a "no later time" for turn in, after which, any firearms found would be grounds for criminal charges.

Regardless, execution of any confiscation policy would require an enormous amount of logistical support and assets that can certainly be disrupted by a determined group of citizens without resorting to directly targeting individuals that are tasked with carrying out such policies.

NO WE WON'T!!!! all of us will REFUSE unlawful orders PERIOD!!!

This "house by house" talk is a red herring. They don't go house to house to enforce current laws and they don't need to go house to house to enforce a new gun ban. They can enforce it the same way they enforce bans on unregistered silencers, marijuana, "armor piercing" ammunition, and pirated movies. If you get caught in public or a neighbor rats you out, they make an example of you.

JP171 wrote:
NO WE WON'T!!!! all of us will REFUSE unlawful orders PERIOD!!!

Then you would be punished/incarcerated/removed and replaced with someone who would.

That's just the way it works.

There are MILLIONS of idiots out there willing to do practically anything for a steady paycheck.

brentski wrote:Maybe something like this would be the preferred method of assisting citizens be in compliance with the new pending laws. Courtesy of Homeland Security.

Big deal. MRAPs can't venture off highway very far because they easily get stuck in mud:
https://www.google.com/search?q=MRAP+st ... 40&bih=651

And they tip over easily:
http://www.michaelyon-online.com/all-th ... page-2.htm

Sooner or later, they have to climb out of those beasts, and then they're on no better than even ground with an insurgency......excuse me.....I meant "citizenry in compliance"......

I'm not so convinced law enforcement or the military would refuse to carry out confiscation orders. I remember reading news reports of gun confiscation in New Orleans in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. Gun owners humbly obeyed, despite their protests of being left completely defenseless against looters. What's more, law enforcement refused to return the guns, and gun owners had to eventually sue them to get them back.

equin wrote:I'm not so convinced law enforcement or the military would refuse to carry out confiscation orders. I remember reading news reports of gun confiscation in New Orleans in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. Gun owners humbly obeyed, despite their protests of being left completely defenseless against looters. What's more, law enforcement refused to return the guns, and gun owners had to eventually sue them to get them back.

I was talking to a young LEO about this two weeks ago. His answer was he would have no choice if it became law.

I am afraid that is the attitude of many of those that will be "ordered" to confiscate.

carlson1 wrote:

equin wrote:I'm not so convinced law enforcement or the military would refuse to carry out confiscation orders. I remember reading news reports of gun confiscation in New Orleans in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. Gun owners humbly obeyed, despite their protests of being left completely defenseless against looters. What's more, law enforcement refused to return the guns, and gun owners had to eventually sue them to get them back.

I was talking to a young LEO about this two weeks ago. His answer was he would have no choice if it became law.

I am afraid that is the attitude of many of those that will be "ordered" to confiscate.

That is disturbing.

equin wrote:I'm not so convinced law enforcement or the military would refuse to carry out confiscation orders. I remember reading news reports of gun confiscation in New Orleans in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. Gun owners humbly obeyed, despite their protests of being left completely defenseless against looters. What's more, law enforcement refused to return the guns, and gun owners had to eventually sue them to get them back.

My understanding from first person accounts is that the NOPD were confiscating guns, but National Guard refused to do so. This may have only been a few people's experiences in limited neighborhoods, but could provide some hope... after all, the NOPD has a track record of zealously enforcing "gun laws" that are not actually on the books, such as taking handguns at traffic stops if the owners cannot produce receipts/proof of ownership.

AndyC wrote:

Jumping Frog wrote:If it ever came to confiscation, I am not going to play the "boating accident" card. I'll be quite up front in saying, they are mine, you cannot have them. If you want them, come and try to take them.

That's a hill I'm prepared to die on, too.

This^

JP171 wrote:NO WE WON'T!!!! all of us will REFUSE unlawful orders PERIOD!!!

Maybe that's true for most of of the military, ignoring Abu Ghraib and some other unpleasant incidents, but I think most police will enforce whatever laws are passed. The United States Constitution says "shall not be infringed" in black and white but police enforce laws against carrying handguns, laws against owning sawed off shotguns, and a hodge podge of laws against carrying certain knives. Many if not most police have already crossed the line by enforcing laws that infringe the right to keep and bear arms, so there's no logical reason to think they wouldn't enforce some more.

A thing to remember about other countries that have done confiscations.

* The UK and AU had centralized regestration of weapons. They had a nice shopping list.
* Both the above countries had private firearm ownership in the hundreds of thousands. the UK has 62 million people, give or take, and Australia has 22 million. Australia bought back some 600k firearms.

Here in the USA, we pretty much have a gun for every person living here. (some 600 MILLION) Confiscation, if it was going to happen, would be extremely costly, and much more difficult than other places where it's happened.

Personally, I don't see any confiscation happening bar an outright repeal of the 2nd amendment. I don't see that even coming close to being possible, even in today's climate.

What we as gun owners need to be doing is outreach. Outreach to people who write things like this:
http://www.starlilyth.net/2012/12/the-e ... in-the-us/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I've said it before i took my hiatus, and i'm saying it again now that i'm back.

nitrogen wrote:What we as gun owners need to be doing is outreach. Outreach to people who write things like this:
http://www.starlilyth.net/2012/12/the-e ... in-the-us/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Here's my outreach, which the coward would not approve.

“WE” didn’t kill anyone. A deranged person did. And if it were possible to get rid of guns in America (it’s not), deranged people would simply find another means toward the end.

It’s idiots like you that blame innocent citizens for the crimes of madmen that got America to the state it’s in now where you think someone exercising their God-given and CONSTITUTIONAL right to bear arms is “violating everyone elses [rights] by endangering us all”.

Madmen endanger you. Law abiding citizens do not. If you can’t figure that simple fact out, please stop voting. You don’t deserve the privilege.

This is all part the Globalist Imperial conversion of the USA..... gun grabbing is a major part of the plan !

The Constitution and BOR stand in their way, notice how we now have the administration and all the major media outlet hacks singing as loud as they can the same tune about beastly guns , the 2nd amendment and automatic weapons. Nose of the camel in the tent !!!!

The Dude wrote:

JP171 wrote:NO WE WON'T!!!! all of us will REFUSE unlawful orders PERIOD!!!

Maybe that's true for most of of the military, ignoring Abu Ghraib and some other unpleasant incidents, but I think most police will enforce whatever laws are passed. The United States Constitution says "shall not be infringed" in black and white but police enforce laws against carrying handguns, laws against owning sawed off shotguns, and a hodge podge of laws against carrying certain knives. Many if not most police have already crossed the line by enforcing laws that infringe the right to keep and bear arms, so there's no logical reason to think they wouldn't enforce some more.

I think that non-Federal law enforcement in most states are more concerned with firearms that come to their attention through use in a crime, than they are about going out of their way to find one that ain't quite up to snuff with Federal firearms laws. I think its what the law says that makes the difference. You don't see county sheriffs going around to shooting ranges checking the length of folks' rifle barrels, for instance, at least I haven't noticed it. However, if someone used an un-registered SBR in a hold-up, yeah, then they would probably report it to the BATFE.