![](http://oi66.tinypic.com/257lt6u.jpg")
Posted on 02/26/2018 4:46:43 PM PST by Swordmaker
Whenever I, or others, object to “registration” or bans on transfers, or other forms of “gun control” and firearms restrictions as steps toward an eventual complete prohibition and the confiscation that such would necessarily entail, we get told we’re paranoid and “nobody wants to take your guns.”
Well, perhaps we should consider these “nobodies”:
This is a good resource of quotes from Damn Liberals who have said in the past they really DO want to confiscate all firearms from the public. So, when you run into that shibboleth that no one wants to confiscate your guns, here is definitive proof they really do. Click on the Article to select the most useful quotation for your purpose. — Swordmaker
(Excerpt) Read more at thewriterinblack.com ...
Except they do.
When he says “take your guns,” it seems to imply “keep them for themselves.” But most of them don’t even want them.
Democrats are nobodies.
Democrats are nobodies.
it will be incrementally like the other laws. I can remember when they passed the seat belt law here. We will NOT stop you just for not having a seat belt on just if we stop you for something else will we ticket you. Well guess what? They can now stop you JUST for not having your seat belt on. See? That’s how they operate.
... says this American man who does not own guns ....
Nelson “Pete” Shields, founder of Handgun Control Inc (now the Brady Center) spelled out how he would do it in a NEW YORKER article in 1976. One little step at a time.
Nelson T. ‘Pete’ Shields
Founder of Handgun Control, Inc.
“I’m convinced that we have to have federal legislation to build on. We’re going to have to take one step at a time, and the first step is necessarily — given the political realities — going to be very modest.
Of course, it’s true that politicians will then go home and say, ‘This is a great law. The problem is solved.’ And it’s also true that such statements will tend to defuse the gun-control issue for a time.
So then we’ll have to strengthen that law, and then again to strengthen that law, and maybe again and again. Right now, though, we’d be satisfied not with half a loaf but with a slice. Our ultimate goal — total control of handguns in the United States — is going to take time.
My estimate is from seven to ten years. The problem is to slow down the increasing number of handguns sold in this country. The second problem is to get them all registered. And the final problem is to make the possession of all handguns and all handgun ammunition — except for the military, policemen, licensed security guards, licensed sporting clubs, and licensed gun collectors — TOTALLY ILLEGAL.”
-Pete Shields, Chairman and founder, Handgun Control Inc., “A Reporter At Large: Handguns,” The New Yorker, July 26, 1976, 57-58
“Yes, I’m for an outright ban [on handguns].”
-Pete Shields, Chairman emeritus, Handgun Control, Inc., 60 Minutes interview
HCI, around 1984, came out in favor of a ban on semi-auto rifles and shotguns.
Diane Feinstein wants your guns.
“If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States, for an outright ban picking up every one of them up...Mr. and Mrs. America turn ‘em all in I would have done it. I could not do it. The votes were not there.”
February 5th, 1995. Diane Feinstein on 60 Minutes
Really? Don’t believe it, this came from a student at the high school in Parkland, retweeted by Little Hogg:
So amazing that these kids are doing this and great plan Chuck!!!!
My plan for gun control.
The only guns allowed for home ownership should be a pistol (revolver) or shotgun. Hunting rifle may be owned but the types of allowable sights prohibited. (Nothing that will allow a shooter to be further away than the cop can focus on). When going on a hunt, it must be registered with local authorities. System to be determined.
No guns to be sold or owned that have a magazine of any type. Only single fire, non-convertible weapons allowed.
Any other weapon that a person wants to own that is currently legal may still be owned but must be kept at a secure firing range. Gun cannot be checked out but a procedure for safe transport or sale of the weapon would be devised.
Practice shooting outside of a range is prohibited.
Private production of bullets is prohibited.
A gun owner can have a onetime life supply of a small number of bullets to bring home. All other bullets must be bought at the range (price issues to be worked out) and used at the range. Must turn in your shells.
If more bullets are desired by owner, missing bullets need to be explained.
Gun owners must have a license after passing a test and must carry insurance. Owner must do a recertification periodicially.
Carry permit issued to any owner that passes all of the above but only weapon that can be carried is a pistol with no more than a 4” barrel. No concealed carry, the gun must be open carried with some form of identifying badge like a cop has.
Most of them want someone else to take your guns.
They also want your employers, your doctors, your mailmen, your neighbors to rat you out and punish you for owning such “evil devices”.
The Sarah Brady quotes are priceless.
She was flagged when she tried to buy her son a .22 rifle from a department store.
Then they need to fire Sheriff Israel for incompetence.
Just as a example of logical thinking.
They will take what they can get now. When another shooting occurs, they will take a little more. It would only take a few more shootings and we would be looking at an Australian plan to confiscate all guns. That is there ultimate goal....
Let’s look at this the way a liberal would. Since all the killings were by people who had NRA membership, we could only deduce that they are Conservatives and we should take all guns away from Conservatives. There’s no point to take guns away from liberals since they didn’t commit these atrocities.
Now the reality,
Since all the killings were by people who are either left wing or muslim, we could only deduce that they are liberals and we should take all guns away from registered democrats, unless they are NRA members. There’s no point to take guns away from Conservatives since they didn’t commit these atrocities.
Of course they want them all seized. It’s the only thing that keeps America free. That’s the whole idea of incremental infringement.
They would have told St. Peter and the Apostles,
“We only want to register your 3 swords.”
Guess what St. Peter would have done-
He woulda chopped off their ears!
L8r
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.