Skip to comments.Gun Control
Posted on 02/16/2019 1:57:51 PM PST by markearl
To all those gun control folks out there, please stop trying to tell us that you don't want a ban on ALL guns. We know thats a lie. The goal has always been the complete prohibition of private ownership of firearms and everybody knows it. You can deny this, But You are either lying to yourself, or everyone else. You have been working incrementally for the last 50 years, slowly but surely passing laws and regulations that are designed to do nothing less that remove all of those DANGEROUS guns. ZIP guns, Saturday night specials, large capacity magazines, assault weapons, automatic weapons.
You have done the same thing with cigarettes, seat belts, etc... Slowly but surely you have reached your goals. And in some cases, you continue to erode the basic freedoms we all enjoy, or suffer depending on your point of view.
Lets take a moment to think about what it would take to reach that utopian goal.
1. changing the constitution - Obviously resending the 2nd amendment from the Constitution would have to be a starting point. I say a starting point because we will need to look at other, troublesome, rights later on.
What does it take to amend the Constitution?
There are 2 ways to amend the U.S. Constitution.
The first way is for both houses of Congress propose a constitutional amendment. This requires a 2/3 vote in each house. Once this happens, the proposed amendment is submitted to the states for ratification. The legislatures of 3/4 of the states must ratify the amendment, within a certain period if specified. At this point, it becomes part of the Constitution. The president has no official role in amending the Constitution (he doesn't have to sign the amendment for it to take effect, and can do nothing to defeat a constitutional amendment once it has passed). Of course, unofficially, presidents can use their political clout to influence public opinion one way or another, which can affect the chances of a constitutional amendment passing.
The second method starts with the states, and was likely included to give states a check on overreaching federal power. The legislatures of the states apply to Congress for a convention to propose amendments to the constitution. If 2/3 of the states make such applications, congress must call the convention. Once such a convention is called, and amendments are proposed, the amendment(s) must be ratified by the legislatures of 3/4 of the states. This method has never actually been used to amend the constitution, but Congress has proposed amendments in response to threats by states to call a convention, likely to retain some control over the amendment process.
Congress can also stipulate that ratification be made by state conventions, rather than legislatures. The only time this has occurred is the 21st Amendment (repealing the 18th Amendment, which was Prohibition, A ban on alcohol. Interesting comparison isn't it?). This method was used to circumvent grass roots opposition to the repeal (the primary impetus for Prohibition in the first place). State legislatures retained the ability to restrict alcohol sale within their borders.
Huzzah, huzzah, the 2nd amendment has been repealed
Eliminating the 2nd amendment doesnt outlaw firearms. In fact, specific, federal statutes would need to be enacted to ban firearm possession. This would require a return to the congress and senate. But this time, the President will need to sign the law. Or congress have enough votes to break a veto.
Now what would happen if legislation was introduced to outlaw firearms? Would ALL of the American public accept that ban? Would any politician really propose such legislation? Well obviously, the answer to that is no, Not only no but HELL NO!
But lets say a starry-eyed zealot proposes, and succeeds in passing, with a veto proof margin the outlawing of private possession of firearms.
Now What? Do you ask everybody to turn in their weapons? I am sure that a lot of law-abiding Americans will do just that. I remember when Canada went to prohibition. Because Canada had a registration requirement, they had records of who owned what weapons. The RCMP then used those records to contact each registered owner and demand an accounting of their firearms. Amazingly, particularly in the rural areas, a majority of those registered weapons had been lost. Shotguns dropped over the side while duck hunting, deer rifles accidently left leaning against trees when the hunter was dressing a kill, or taking a comfort break. It seems that a lot of Canadians were accident prone when it came to their firearms. But the only reason that the Canadian government was able to even marginally successfully preform a confiscation program was the previous required registration of all firearms.
The United States doesn't require a universal registration of firearms, BUT because of the requirement for a federal background check, I can guarantee that there is a record of those checks. Now I am sure that some folks are going to say, OH, they don't keep those records. They erase them. Yeah, Right. And I'm sure that you agree that whats on the internet can be erased too.
A Federal Government requiring a universal registration would probably trigger a 5th amendment challenge on self-incrimination. Unless it is accepted by the supreme court, as constitutional, but most likely require another constitutional challenge.
Buts lets continue on with this exercise. The federal government enacts a universal 100 percent confiscation of all firearms.
What is going to happen when the local police officer shows up at your door and demands your, now illegal, pistol, rifle, shotgun? And being the dedicated NRA member, local outlaw Militia member, or drug cartel operative, you tell him, I'm sorry Officer, we have no firearms in this house. I lost it last year when hunting. What is he to do? Does he take you at your word and move on down the street to your neighbor?
No, I don't think so. I think that what will happen is a warrantless search and confiscation of your weapon and your probable arrest will happen.
EXCEPT there is that pesky 14th amendment. Protecting you from warrantless search and seizure.
So now lets review, we have had to repeal not only the 2nd amendment (The right to bear arms), but also the 5th amendment (freedom from self-incrimination) and the 14th amendment (Warrantless search and seizure) AND as a 2 fer on the 14th, Fair compensation for confiscated property.
But lets continue on with our fantasy. ALL firearms have been outlawed and confiscated. There are NO firearms in private hands anywhere in the United States of America. OH HAPPY DAY, WE HAVE ARRIVED !!!!!!!
Wait a minute, Sorry to rain on your parade. Anybody with a half way decent machine shop can make their own firearms. Including fully automatic assault rifles. Guess what? The information and plans are on the internet, and have been for years. And even longer in that stone age equivalent, the library. During world war 2 the British sten gun was designed to built in just that manner. The idea was that French and other partisan groups would make their own weapons. The Pre-Israel Jews made thousands of these weapons in hidden basement armorys.
The recipe for gunpowder has also been around for centuries. Any high school chemistry student can brew up his own gunpowder. Or if you didn't have chemistry, again the internet and library are packed with useful information
So, now you will have to not only censor the internet and books. Eliminate chemistry and metal shop from school curriculums.
But you'll still have those pesky books, hidden away in the basement or attic.
And finally, we will need to consider the ultimate irony. We have achieved nirvana. There are no guns in the United States. And there is no way to make a gun. Peace on Earth
Anytime something is in short supply and illegal, the void will be filled. Case in point, Drugs. They pour through our borders like rainfall. With no solution in sight. It is only reasonable to expect the same for firearms. What is to stop a dozen AK47's to be included in that ton of cocaine? Are we going to legalize all drugs? Will we hook our children on heroin to save them from a bullet?
I guess the solution will end up being,,,,,,
An impenetrable wall on our borders so that we can control who and what comes into our country.
What they want is centralized gun ownership since they say that only cops should have guns. Only Gubmint agencies should have guns. THEN they don't mind that guns are in the hands of some people.
They should at least be honest and say what they mean. Their language surely tells us what they mean.
Of course I’ll still possess them. Not even a question there.
But i need to carry it with me. That’s the problem.
Every time one of these jerks starts blathering about gun control, someone should ask them this question: Will the government be as successful at keeping illegal guns from flooding across the border into the hands of criminals as they were at keeping out illegal drugs and illegal aliens?
“You have been working incrementally for the last 50 years”
Actually, no that’s not entirely correct. With the National Firearms Act of 1934 it’s been closer to 85 years. Interestingly FDR just happened to be Prez at that time. Also socialism had a grip on our nation during the depression era.
We got a reprieve with Truman, Eisenhower and Kennedy. Then along comes LBJ and we get the Gun Control Act of 1968 and IMO the single most damaging pace of socialism that we are still living with today - the Great Society that made everything worse that it was intended to combat.
“a firm grip, a practiced aim, controlled breathing, and smooth trigger pull.
Oh yeah, and practice, practice, practice ....
Even a quick ‘point and shoot’ can be practiced enough to be accurate.”
I keep shooting low to the left. My gun control is poor.
In New Mexico its already here. The Democratic left-wing anti-gun nutters elected last November passed a bill in the state senate this past Wednesday that would require a federal background check for all gun sales between private citizens. And that includes trades and barters. A similar bill has already passed the NM House. The new “progressive” governor has already said she will sign the final bill after senate-house differences are resolved.
But that’s not all. The NM House just passed a “red-flag” bill that allows cops to come to you residence and sieze your guns if you are believed to be a threat to yourself or others. Of course, the cops would have get a court order, but who doubts with liberal, anti-gun Democratic judges on the NM bench that approval would be almost automatic.
There’s more in the Rat pipeline, but you get the idea.
What America needs is “common sense socialism control”. We don’t want crazed socialists in our schools or churches or menacing government buildings and courts.
It’s just sensible to have a national background check for socialists, but don’t worry, it will never be used to create a socialist registry. The check would look for any criminal record and outstanding warrants, any record of mental illness, or if they are a child or spouse abuser, and then local authorities “may issue” socialist licenses to anyone over 21. Annually renewable for $500.
Of course, they must identify themselves as licensed socialists to any LEO who detains them.
Nice write up. You posted this is bloggers but neglected to give us the link to your blog. Maybe this should have been posted in chat?
You see, I had decided a while back I need to add a single stack 9mm to our collection. It would fill a niche and need between the larger 9mm double-stacks my wife and I have, and the little 380. There are several common clothing combinations that just don't work with my double-stack, and I'm just not a fan of the snappy little 380.
After doing some research I had convinced myself I wanted to try the new Mossberg MC1SC. Then I visited several gun shops today. At every one it was the same story: none available, no idea when they'll be in, no idea at what price point since backlog and demand/interest is high at the moment.
Then at the one store the salesman showed me several alternatives - yes the Glock 43, a Sig, and a S&W M&P Shield M2.0. Now, I'm fair with my Glock, and actually pretty good with the wife's M&P. So I lost self control and picked up the Shield. I've already disassembled and cleaned it, practiced operating it with snap-caps, and loaded it. Weather permitting I'm headed to the range with it tomorrow.
Yep, a guy with proper "gun control" might have waited...
Rescind. Author didn’t review his article, and there are a couple of other errors.
Still, good analysis
“Why Johnny Ringo,
You look like Someone just
Walked over Your Grave!”
: ) What a movie!
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.