Posted on 12/24/2012 8:40:00 PM PST by neverdem
Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., said that she and other gun control advocates are considering a law that would create a program to purchase weapons from gun owners, a proposal that could be compulsory.
“We are also looking at a buy-back program,” Feinstein said today in a press conference. “Now, again, this is a work in progress so these are ideas in the development.”
Gov. Andrew Cuomo, D-N.Y., already discussed the possibility of a buy-back law for his state, but he made clear it would be a forced buyback.
“Confiscation could be an option,” Cuomo told The New York Times yesterday when discussing semiautomatic weapons. “Mandatory sale to the state could be an option. Permitting could be an option — keep your gun but permit it.”
Australia implemented a mandatory buyback program in 1996 following a mass shooting. “The law banned semiautomatic and automatic rifles and shotguns and put in place a mandatory buy-back program for newly banned weapons,” USA Today recalls. “The buyback led to the destruction of 650,000 gun.”
Some liberal activists want the policy imitated here. “That would be like destroying 50 million guns in America today,” the Center for American Progress’ Matt Miller wrote after noting that Australia eliminated 20 percent of the weapons in the country. “The Australian ‘outlaw and repurchase’ option is one approach. But if Congress balks at banning certain weapons entirely, it could make gun owners an offer they can’t refuse. Instead of $200 a gun, Uncle Sam might offer $500.”
Feinstein also said that that former President Bill Clinton had volunteered, on a phone call, to help her get a new gun law passed.
“[Clinton] was talking about the battle back in 1993 with the bill that, interestingly enough, was introduced and passed within the year fo 1993 and went into effect in 1994,” she said. “And, of course, he was president and the White House came alive and was very very helpful in enabling the passage of that bill both in the senate and in the House. So, to have him part of the team again is really quote special for us.”
***Trade in your tired aged liberal politician***
Not only her but every Hollywood and Wall St billionaire in the USA has armed bodyguards. Most of them are good buddies and financially support the likes of Schumer, Nadler, Bloomberg, Feinstein, and others. While those with political and "elite" status will have their own in-house protection, they want the sheep and cattle fully disarmed because they want them kept as serfs and subjects.
Because they controlled the propaganda message, they were able to turn public opinion against what they viewed as the uncontrolled Tea Party, into a so called racist mob. These "elites" control the Democrats and many of the Republicans. They've been attempting to portray Constitutionalists as enemies of the state, and they are coming for your rights. They divide and conquer and most of us are too hung up and detached with their phony left v right tactics to see through their fog. They want us sheep (just as on 9-11) to believe that having their security blanket is better than freedom.
These racist bxstards (and they are racists) will attempt to divide and conquer again by using propaganda to vilify and turn society against legal firearms owners.
Back in the 90s didn’t the hellhole state of CA have a mandatory turn in program for certain SKS rifles, and didn’t it flop big time?
I posted the recent stats from Australia upthread, and I never maintained that Australia has no gun deaths at all, so why are you showing me this?
Damian Leeding died btw.
I also made it clear that we have an entirely different culture, our population isn’t as ‘diverse’ as your is in the US and a large portion of the gun deaths included in the stats are suicides and accidents.
Comparing Australian stats with the US is not only futile, in most cases the numbers are quoted quite dishonestly...by US sources. Manipulated to make you feel better maybe?
Stick to the facts.
Crime falling across Australia
4 March 2012
Minister for Home Affairs and Minister for Justice Jason Clare today released the Australian Institute of Criminology’s (AIC) annual report into crime trends which shows the crime rates continue to fall across most major categories.
“This is a good result for law enforcement agencies across the country, but we still have a lot more work to do – the recent shootings are proof of that,” Mr Clare said.
“That’s why a couple of weeks ago I announced that the Australian Crime Commission would conduct a National Intelligence Assessment of the illegal firearm market and its links to gang activity in Australia.
“The Federal Government and State and Territory Governments are also working together on nationally consistent legislation to tackle criminal organisations.”
The key statistics in the AIC’s Australian Crime: Facts and Figures report are:
Break-ins have been cut by about half since 1996;
Car theft has dropped by about 61 per cent over the past decade;
The overall number of violent crimes decreased in 2010 except for the offence of kidnapping and abduction;
Of the five categories of violent crime, four recorded a drop in the number of victims between 2009 and 2010 – homicide, assault, sexual assault and robbery;
The most common weapon used in homicide in 2009–10 was a knife. Knives were involved in 39 per cent of all homicides;
Firearms used in 13 per cent of all homicides;
There has been a 27 per cent drop in the number of homicides between 1996 and 2010, with a drop of 11 per cent between 2009 and 2010;
The homicide rate is 1.2 per 100,000 population;
The number of victims of robbery in 2010 is the lowest on record since 1996, with 14,582 victims. Robbery victim numbers peaked in 2001 with 26,591 victims;
Murder and sexual assault occurred most frequently within residential settings - 61 percent of murders occurred in a residential dwelling and 63 percent of sexual assaults occurred in a residential dwelling;
Assault rates decreased from 801 per 100,000 people in 2009 to 766 per 100,000 in 2010;
In 2010, there were 17,757 recorded sexual assaults, down from 18,807 the previous year;
The rate of fraud victimisation dropped by 11 per cent from 2009 to 2011 and, since peaking in 1998-99, has declined by 35 per cent;
In 2009–10, the offending rate for people aged 15 to 19 years was almost four times the rate for all other offenders (6,751 compared with 1,821 offenders per 100,000);
In 2009–10, 2,767 arrests involving heroin were made – an 81 percent decrease in arrests over the past decade;
In 2009–10, cannabis accounted for the highest number of drug-related arrests with 57,170 arrests - an increase of three percent from 2008–09; and
In 2009-10 the number of cocaine arrests increased by 47 per cent rising to 1,244 from 848 in 2008-09 but cocaine arrests remain lower than for any other drug type.
This annual publication is compiled from information provided by sources in each state and territory, and the Australian Bureau of Statistics.
The full report can be accessed online at www.aic.gov.au and a summary of the report’s findings is attached.
That's not an explanation. So you are just making things up.
The NRA is no friend to liberty.
Really? What organization has done more to support the 2nd Amendment, gun rights, safety, instruction and education?
They are also on record having supported limiting magazine sizes
That's a lie. One director five years ago, not the organization. Your as dishonest as Obama.
NRA Executive Vice President Franklin L. Orth, NRA's American Rifleman Magazine, March 1968,
In case no one told you, this is nearly 2013. Did you ever hear of Harlan Carter, Neal Knox and Cincinnati? It appears you are the person whose head is in your colon.
Federal funding of a police force in every school. Yup. That's about what I said:
What police force? You're heavy on accusations, allegations, disinformation and outright lies and very light on facts.
SAF on rights. Had the NRA stuck with safety, instruction and education as my post suggested, they'd have been on solid ground. Putting Federally funded officers in local schools is tyrannical.
One director five years ago, not the organization.
The organization elected the director. Would you like a list of more NRA directors who have a very active record supporting Federal gun control?
D.A.M.N.
The stats quoted include SUICIDE AND ACCIDENTS
http://www.aic.gov.au/publications/current%20series/tandi/261-280/tandi269/view%20paper.html
As previously indicated, the use of firearms to inflict fatal injury declined over the period examined. This decline is most conspicuous in the case of non-handgun firearms (Figure 4), illustrated by a comparing two time periods: 1991-1995 and 1997-2001 (the year 1996 was excluded because of the Port Arthur homicides in which 35 people were killed in an incident involving one offender who used military style firearms, leading to subsequent firearm reforms). The mean number of handgun related deaths between 1991 and 1995 was 28 and the mean number of other firearm related deaths was 371. Between 1997 and 2001 the mean number of handgun related deaths was 39 and the mean number of other firearm related deaths was 210. A comparison between the two time periods reveals that while other firearm related deaths decreased by 43 per cent, handgun related deaths increased by 36 per cent (although care should be exercised when comparing these proportionate changes due to the relatively small number of handgun deaths that occur in Australia each year).
THOSE WHO QUOTE ANY INCREASE IN HOMICIDES BY GUN IN AUSTRALIA APPARENTLY HAVE AN AGENDA.
In total there were 5083 registered deaths attributable to firearms in Australia between 1991 and 2001. Suicides committed with firearms accounted for the majority of these deaths (77%), followed by firearms homicide (15%), firearms accidents (5%), firearms deaths resulting from legal intervention and undetermined deaths (2%). Over the 11 year period the number and rate of firearm related deaths has decreased (Figure 1 and Table 1)
Each time I have provided this information about Australia, it’s interpreted as if I am recommending gun control in the US. I’m not. I just resent the misleading information you are provided with - we are a different country with a different history and culture - and population mix. I think you need to keep your guns, but you also need to stop manipulating our statistics in your arguments.
They want to offer to buy our guns with our own money? Very clever, these politicians, eh?
Well, while I fully respect that line of reasoning, at this point I, myself, am “all in”.
I will use every legal means to resist: that includes sending some money to NRA and GOA and JPFO, writing my congress critters, and doing whatever I can locally in the RKBA community. Take a liberal to a range, teach someone to shoot while it’s still legal. That sort of thing.
If they come for my guns first, so be it. But having had this conversation with some of my pals in local law enforcement, the Federales are going to need their own special ops guys do the dirty work. And they might want to start with the cops. Or maybe not, depending on their taste for lead.
Molon Labe.
Oh, and remember to B.L.O.A.T.
Our Constitution limits government power and grants almost all of it to the people.
Feinstein and her ilk want to flip that on it’s head.
Frankly, it’s time to roll back 90% of government, starting today.
Please post your evidence. Despite being a gun rights advocate for more than 35 years, the Second Amendment Foundation remains in the shadows of larger Second Amendment advocacy groups...
The organization elected the director.
The people of California elected Feinstein and Pelosi, didn't they? You're a Californian just like them.
The military will follow orders.
Gun prosecutions under Obama down more than 45 percent
Exclude DC, Chicago, LA, Philly, E.St.louis & Baltimore and we’d probably have the gun murder rate of Switzerland.
It is going to get worse this new year.
God help us.
They will go for every thing.
Federally funded armed guards is an exercise of police power. Just because they are not nominally police doesn't change that. Hence, it is you who are the spin artist here.
Example: You had to add "education and training" to your qualification of a gun rights organization, even though I had already acknowledged the NRA's effectiveness in that light (also noting their failure to go to that strength with their proposed prescription). You did that to try to force me to agree that the NRA is the leader in that regard, thus holding them as an effective gun rights organization, which they are not.
That's duplicity and misrepresentation on your part. Your projections match the tactics of a Democrat in that regard.
Example: When I posted about how background checks that the NRA has supported to this day were abused with FIST, you didn't acknowledge it at all. Despite the fact that the NRA had warning of such and witnessed said abuse before the fact, they supported it anyway. Hence, they continue to support what is effectively gun registration by another name.
You just left that one alone. That's dishonest too. So you can fling crap all you like, but so far, it looks to me like you are wearing it.
Never, never, never give a government increased police powers without serious consideration along with obvious and quickly exercisable means to rescind that extension of federal power. Yet that is exactly what the NRA proposes. Never do it in the heat of the political moment. Yet that is exactly what the NRA has done. Once said "armed guards" are in place (and doing not a damned thing 95% of the time in return for their fat paychecks, health care plans, and crooked retirement funds foisted upon States teetering upon bankruptcy), there is every reason to expect both failure to act and abuse of power. So the net effect I see with the NRA proposal is that "retired police officers" will get TWO outrageous pensions instead of one. Worse, the school district faces the prospects of crippling lawsuits should they refuse by following some other more cost effective path.
You are very heavy on personal attacks, having offered NOTHING in the way of exculpatory evidence upon behalf of the NRA.
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.