 |
Every time someone cries wolf about gun confiscation, it becomes a little less believable.
The DiFi CW2 video, to help educate these low-information college students.
Posted on 03/09/2013 10:24:04 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
Over the past few weeks, I’ve written a series of columns about some of the myths perpetuated by the gun lobby. One on the claims made about the “cosmetic features” of assault rifles, another about the idea of the Second Amendment as a “self-destruct” mechanism.
This time, I’m focusing on the biggest myth of them all: that the government is coming for our guns.
This is simply not true.
At this time, no serious person is suggesting confiscation as a viable solution to the gun violence problem. I mean it. Anyone who honestly believes, or even suggests, that it would be right, feasible or a good idea to take legally owned guns away from law abiding citizens is kidding themselves.
The government is not coming for the peoples’ guns. Legally, it never can, thanks to the 2008 and 2010 Supreme Court decisions in District of Columbia v. Heller and McDonald v. Chicago, which guarantee an individual right to bear arms.
These cases really should have ended the most immediate fears of a government confiscation program once and for all, but here we are today, still seeing advertisements from the NRA, like one released on February 12 titled “Ask Obama’s Experts,” saying that the president’s gun control proposals would lead to confiscation.
Let’s say this is true. The president, or anyone in the government, for that matter, can talk all they want about confiscating firearms, but the fact is that it will never happen. According to D.C. v. Heller and McDonald v. Chicago, they can’t even force you to put a trigger-lock on your gun.
This makes the threat of confiscation essentially a non-issue....
(Excerpt) Read more at flyernews.com ...
More importantly, google Australia, et al
“At this time, no serious person is suggesting confiscation as a viable solution to the gun violence problem.”
First three words say it all. What they are doing is building the infrastructure to make it possible AT ANOTHER TIME.
Wow - that took me all of five minutes on Google.
I hope other U of Dayton students actually study the things they’re talking about...
Several state legislatures have put forward proposals for confiscation laws that they have cleverly disguised by calling them "confiscation laws" in the last three months. This author should stick to playing with yarn balls.
Thank you for posting that. That’s what I’m talking about. lol
Gerbalism major trying out his bed-wetting chops?
This one is strong in the (BS) Force. He will do well.
I agre. Another nutcase.
I didn't know the decision and means and timeline was entirely up to you, Mac.
I never even heard of Matthew Worsham before in my life (and probably never will again!)
At this time, no serious person is suggesting confiscation as a viable solution to the gun violence problem. I mean it.
Do they let you out of that facility often?
“At this time, no serious person is suggesting confiscation as a viable solution to the gun violence problem. I mean it.”
Oh, higher edumacation, emmm I mean indoctrination , ain’t it just grand.
I guess we need to really really really listen to this clown because he/she/it “means it”. If we do not listen to him/her/it, he/she/it may put all of us grown ups in “time out”.
And just think, either his/her/its parents or the tax payer is picking up the tab for his/her/its higher learning.
One of the gun-grabbers’ favorite tactics is to ridicule gun rights supporters by saying, “they’re not going to take your guns”. They know that’s a lie.
I think, on paper, what he says is true: for political reasons the gun grabbers aren’t going to enact a straight-up gun confiscation law.
I think if you look at the laws they’re seeking to pass, you’ll see a pattern of trying to establish a de facto gun ban: a web of strangling regulations that make it too difficult and expensive for the average citizen to legally own a gun. For them, the beauty of the scheme is that the “elite” people—like Hollywood lefties—will still be able to have armed bodyguards because they’ll have the money and the pull.
For us the effect will be the same, but lumps of fecal matter like this college brat will still claim “hey we didn’t ban guns...”
The other thing is that the government has *already* come for our guns, repeatedly - Katrina confiscations (where it was caught on video), the Dinkins seizures in NY, the CA SKS confiscations...
I wish they would just come for them, nationwide confiscation so we can get this party started already.
|
The DiFi CW2 video, to help educate these low-information college students.
Thanks for posting your links on the student newspaper. Probably too much information for mush-brained students.
At this time, no serious person is suggesting confiscation as a viable solution to the gun violence problem. I mean it.
Whew! I'm glad that's finally been crossed off the list of things to be concerned about. Now that we know the feral government has no interest in confiscating our guns, I'm sure we won't have to listen to any more gibberish about so-called "gun control," will we?
Well, that settles it then. I mean if He's written a series of columns then the issue is settled.
AP article linked by Drudge. Dems worried?
Lemmie see, now.
New York (spit!) City ‘requires’ gun owners (permit required, of course) to further “register” all semi-auto rifles.
LESS THAN THREE years later—”give ‘em UP!” (Or else!)
This guy’s an obvious liar.
Registration=confiscation (after a year or so.)
1. Our government would never do anything really bad to us.
2. The media would warn us if they were about to, or have started doing so.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.