Posted on 03/12/2018 6:01:06 AM PDT by Kaslin
The recent gun control debate ignited by last month’s tragedy in Parkland, Florida, has liberals trotting out what has become a favorite Leftist talking point - Australia’s 1996 National Agreement on Firearms, an act which, among other things, severely restricted semi-automatic rifles after after a similarly horrific mass shooting.
Liberals consider the cornerstone of the law, a massive forced gun buyback program, a “common sense” approach to what might otherwise be perceived by gun owners as an unwelcome curtailing of traditional American freedoms. Sure, the government may be forcing gun owners to make the transaction, but exchanging money for items IS capitalism, right? And it sure beats the alternative, a Communist-style door-to-door roundup of weapons that both sides agree would likely lead to civil war.
Don’t get me wrong, I think most true Leftists would LOVE to harness the power of the State to crush liberty-minded gun owners by every means necessary, and if a few of the right eggs are broken in the process, so much the better. But realists on both sides know such a scenario is highly unlikely to happen, at least to a result the Left would want. In all likelihood, open displays of tyrannical force such as openly rounding up certain people groups or door-to-door weapons confiscations are highly likely to result in open displays of resistance, and a civil war that is likely to be fought, and won, by the good guys.
On this matter, right-wing pundits are correct:
On the topic of whether or not citizens could resist “violent tyranny,” Townhall’s Kurt Schlichter writes, “The short answer is, ‘Yes.’ As Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan all teach, a decentralized insurgency with small arms can effectively confront a modern police/military force ... But the bottom line is that two untrained idiots with handguns shut down Boston. What do you think 100 million Americans – many trained and some battle-tested – could do with their rifles?”
“There is no other way around it: The mandatory confiscation of the American citizenry’s guns would involve tens of thousands of heavily armed federal agents going door-to-door to demand of millions of Americans that they surrender their guns. That. Is. Not. Going. To. Happen,” opines National Review’s Mark Wright.
“Make no mistake, armed rebellion would be the consequence,” writes Varad Mehta for The Federalist in a piece that’s par for the course when it comes to most thinking on the right. “Armed men would be dispatched to confiscate guns, they would be met by armed men, and blood would be shed. Australia is a valid example for America only if you are willing for that blood to be spilled in torrents and rivers. To choose Australia is to choose civil war.”
Even the more sane gun control proponents are wise to the political situation. University of Sydney professor Philip Alpers, who is also the founding director of GunPolicy.org, told the New York Times, “What Australia did was a confiscation of private property under the threat of jail time, compensated or not. That wouldn’t wash in the United States.”
Further, when unduly oppressive laws are actually passed in the United States, such as recent laws in New York and Connecticut passed after the Sandy Hook massacre, they are often ignored by the majority of gun owners and sparsely enforced by the states themselves. “New York and Connecticut authorities so far have shown no inclination to enforce their laws by going door to door to round up unregistered guns and arrest their owners,” Mehta wrote in the 2015 piece. “But that’s what would be necessary to enforce the law. A federal law, therefore, would require sweeping, national police action involving thousands of lawmen and affecting tens of millions of people. If proponents of gun control are serious about getting guns out of Americans’ hands, someone will have to take those guns out of Americans’ hands.”
Sure, it’s hard to argue with Mehta’s logic, at least on the surface. And it’s a good thing for gun owners, right?
Not necessarily, not if you look just beneath that surface.
Consider: If rational minds on the Left know all this, to what end are they still pushing for such laws, especially when it’s obvious that they don’t care whether ANY gun control laws are actually enforced. Not yet anyway. (Remember, it’s always conservatives, not liberals, pushing for enforcement of existing law.)
And yet, they do want more and more laws on the books, and the more draconian, obscure, and hard to keep track of, the better. But why?
Here’s the answer, and it should scare every gun owner in the country:
They want to make de facto criminals out of the majority of the gun owning population.
That way, they can essentially pick us off, one by one.
Without necessarily meaning to, Mehta hits on this critical point in his piece: “A national gun buyback law would turn a significant portion of the American people into criminals,” he wrote. “Residents of New York and Connecticut snubbed their new laws … Compliance with the registration requirement has been modest at best, as hundreds of thousands of gun owners in both states refused to register their weapons. So far, then, the laws have been most successful in creating hundreds of thousands of lawbreakers who feel obligated to break the law.”
If liberals are able to pass any sort of “assault weapons” ban, buyback or no buyback, they know they will make criminals out of several million currently law-abiding gun owners. And even if the majority of those gun owners don’t follow the law now, that won’t make them any less a criminal. They just haven’t been caught yet.
But when the ‘right people’ control the levers of power and the ‘right laws’ are all in place, make no mistake - they will be caught.
Here’s the rub. It’s one thing to hold up your rifle and shout “come and take it,” à la Charleton Heston, before thousands of like-minded people. The Feds aren’t going to come to a National Rifle Association convention and start arresting people, at least not yet. And they aren’t going to conduct door-to-door house searches, arresting gun owners and confiscating their firearms, either. Not yet.
But believe me, under the right circumstances and with the right laws in place, the arrests will come. They’ll come when you’re going to work, or to the bank, or to the park with your kids, or a thousand other places. They’ll come after you’ve used your now-illegal AR-15 to defend yourself against a home invader, or if they spot it during a “routine” home search.
Never, ever underestimate these people and the depth of their evil. Remember, the Cheka managed to fill the Soviet gulags to the brim, and yet they did it quietly, with little fuss and even less armed revolt.
And they won’t need to arrest everyone to make the majority obey. No, they only need a few, and word will spread quickly.
So what will you do, dear AR-15 owner, when the ‘Cheka’ comes for your neighbor, and you know the laws are on the books to prosecute? Will a “buyback” and “amnesty” be enough to convince YOU to acquiesce? You’ve got a job, a wife, kids to raise. When they “come and take it,” is your family worth risking?
No, when they take your guns there will be no civil war. There will be no large-scale revolution, because liberals are experts at pushing that Overton Window enough not to shock the system. Like frogs in water that’s about to boil, people won’t jump until it’s too late.
That is why it’s so important to not get complacent and believe a worse case scenario will never happen. That’s why it’s critical to fight the gun controllers’ efforts to change the law at EVERY turn, using EVERY legal means possible.
Long before they “come and take” our guns, and our freedoms.
That is why it’s so important to not get complacent and believe a worse case scenario will never happen. That’s why it’s critical to fight the gun controllers’ efforts to change the law at EVERY turn, using EVERY legal means possible.
Long before they “come and take” our guns, and our freedoms.
Turning every legal gun owner into a “de facto crimial” would have functionally the same effect as an armed mass confiscation. The only difference would be a lag where a somewhat larger number of gun owners would be “picked off one by one” before everyone else reacted.
Oh, and regarding the bit about the Cheka and the gulags, remember the Solzhenitsyn quote about “how we burned in the camps later”. The Russian people didn’t have guns, but they all knew about the neighbor who was visited by the Cheka. If every gun owner knows that the confiscation still happens, but happens as a consequence of encountering LEO in some other context, gun owners will begin to treat LEO as the enemy, and will act accordingly. How long will it take before the police no longer want to respond to crime due to being afraid of running up against a gun owner? How long will the public stand for a police force that won’t act thanks to the new gun law? And how long will it take before the right-leaning but non-gun public gets tired of facing escalating crime now that the criminals know they won’t be opposed? The leftist public might not connect the dots, but the right will.
Who do they think they are messing with? We are not Australian’s we are Americans and we are ready to resist a totalitarian government at a drop of a hat. It will start slow but will gain momentum and it will turn into the bloodiest and uprising in our history. The military will be divided and will side with the people and the Constitution. The libtards will take it hard and be forced into hiding or face extinction .We must save our country and that time is coming.
I think the author is right. The left is not stupid. They have plenty of brilliant minds looking for ways to rob Americans of our rights, and they KNOW an overt, large scale gun confiscation would result in a civil war. That’s why they plan to make it more onerous to legally own/buy guns and ammunition. As the author noted, the plan is to slowly bring the pot to a boil so the frog doesn’t know it’s being cooked.
That’s why we must not budge. The freedom to bear arms is a God given individual right.
The worst thing they can do is the frog in the pot approach.
Pass the law then not enforce it for awhile.
Then start picking people of calling them dangerous and mentally ill.
Soon one has friends and neighbors turning gun owners in and in time owning a firearm is socially unacceptable
“No, when they take your guns there will be no civil war. There will be no large-scale revolution, because liberals are experts at pushing that Overton Window enough not to shock the system. Like frogs in water that’s about to boil, people won’t jump until it’s too late.”
Guns are being taken from those under 21. What will be the next group? Will anyone care?
There are many here that are fine with it. That is the scary part. And when they come for your guns, it will be too late because nobody will be left that cares. To totally mangle a poem about the Nazis ...
As long as the politicos keep rewarding the school shooters with new gun control laws, then these school shootings will keep happening.
The worst thing they can do is the frog in the pot approach.
Pass the law then not enforce it for awhile.
Then start picking people of calling them dangerous and mentally ill.
Soon one has friends and neighbors turning gun owners in and in time owning a firearm is socially unacceptable
Welcome to the Peoples Republic of Illinois!!! So many are leaving this state it will be a nice little Socialist utopia within 4 years.
This is why I have not replaced the guns that I lost during my TBA.
Says the keyboard commando
Exactly.
Agents of the Cheka and Gestapo never had to worry about their identities, home addresses, family member names & where they go to school, being uploaded on Google Earth & the internet.
Now...the recent explosion in GVRO/ERPO legislation in liberal states WILL result in horrible abuse where anyone with a grudge automatically becomes a police informant with the power to ruin lives. But they have home addresses, too.
Climate of fear, distrust, & thirst for revenge may soon be upon us. But we’re supposed to turn in our guns.
NEVER EVER trust those in the government to have your best interests at heart.
When O-care at last made it to the Supreme Court, we believed (as per our Constitution) that it could never stand as law.
And were we right? NO! Only because ‘they’ proclaimed it to
be.
And when BO’B was nominated for Presidential office, educated persons knew that this could never be. He was not and never could be a Natural Born Citizen. Born in Kenya? Who knows? He did have a Kenyan named as father on his birth certificate.
And were we right? NO! Only because ‘they’ proclaimed it to
be.
We believed that our government would protect us from such a travesty. They did not and never approached the subject to attempt to investigate the fraud.
Government has two strikes against them. What will be the third before the game is called?
The real issue to be addressed here is the “restaffing” of the SCOTUS with Gorsuch clones, then “forcing” them to finally lay to rest the notion that the Second Amendment is nothing more or less than what it clearly states. Then let “settled law” protect the country from any future attempts to subvert the Bill of Rights, any part of it! Then the only way to confiscate guns would be to have a national referendum on the 2A where the people overturned the Amendment.
The liberals/Marxists chip away at every part of the Constitution. (with exception of the 16th) They are willing to wait it out in order to get what they want.
Of course they complain whenever Republicans put forth a bill that also chips away at the Constitution claiming it doesn’t go far enough.
They can all KISS MY ASS!
The military will be divided and will side with the people and the Constitution.
!~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I would not count on that.
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.