WildCat
NWO Master Conspirator
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2003
- Messages
- 59,856
If true Colorado is an oddball that way.
Why gun control push fizzled?
- Thread starter Ranb
- Start date
newyorkguy
Penultimate Amazing
Amending the Second Amendment to specifically void the gun ownership provision would be difficult. When I wrote that I doubted Congress would be able to override it, I was referring to the fact any such process would begin there. Congress alone can not amend the Constitution.
Link
If thirteen states failed to ratify the amendment it would not pass. In my mind, given the emotion this issue would engender, that is an impossible hurdle to overcome. Not that anyone is trying to overcome it.
Sabretooth
No Ordinary Rabbit
Sure...I guess it depends a bit on where you live as well. In my village, you cannot leave an unregistered car sitting immobile* on your lot for an extended period of time (I don't recall the limit, but IIRC, it's 90 days).
But the rule was crafted because unused vehicles become a hotbed for vermin and insects. Forcing people to register a dead vehicle was just a way to get people to get the junk taken care of.
I can't say that's the same reasons why where you live, but I understand that most cities and villages have such laws on their books.
*[Yes, the village ordnance specifically states "immobile", so technically, if you were to move it periodically, they cannot do anything about it.]
Just to clarify, the one quote of a current politician wanting to ban all guns that gets thrown out every time we point out that no one really wants to take your guns was really just about assault weapons?
So even though I was willing to admit that there may be those on the fringe who want a ban, they have to be further out on the fringe than Feinstein! Hell, that isn't even on the same rug.
So, when we say that registration is not a precursor to confiscation, or gun ownership licensing is not a precursor to confiscation, who are you going to point to in support of the slippery slope argument?
Point missed.
Registration is not a precursor to confiscation. It is not even helpful.
If the government ever bans guns it will not rely on a registration system to determine who has guns. That would be the worst confiscation effort ever!
You over estimate the evilness of government and underestimate its power.
NoahFence
Banned
If congress were to get the votes to repeal the 2nd Amendment, it would be due to the fact that the majority of the American public asked for it.
That's what we refer to as "democracy".
balrog666
Eigenmode: Cynic
- Joined
- May 24, 2004
- Messages
- 2,974
Congress can't repeal the 2nd Amendment.
And we are a representative republic, not a "democracy" ...
Middle school social studies was so long ago, why must you insist on bringing back the memories we have all pushed aside?
tyr_13
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Aug 8, 2008
- Messages
- 18,095
newyorkguy
Penultimate Amazing
NoahFence
Banned
Oh nitpicking....
The fact of the matter is nobody can repeal the 2nd Amendment without a massive majority of Americans giving their blessing.
The point is that'll never happen.
That it's a bad idea doesn't necessarily argue that people wouldn't do it.
It's not so much that it is a bad idea as it is just the most limp wristed way to go about removing guns from a population. Do we rely on drug dealers to self report?
Again, people who fear that registration will lead to confiscation under estimate the power of government and over estimate its evil.
WildCat
NWO Master Conspirator
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2003
- Messages
- 59,856
Drug dealers are illegal to begin with, there's no such thing as a law-abiding drug dealer by definition.
Law abiding people would, by definition, register their guns. Are you seriously going to claim it doesn't make it easier for the government to confiscate them once they know who has what guns and where they are?
And I hope you're not going to the absurd extreme lomiller and others went to in another thread, and insist that a letter to registered guns registered owners demanding that they turn them in by a certain date or face criminal penalties isn't confiscation.
First, I am saying that confiscation is illogical and I see no reason to think that there ever will be confiscation. Neither Feinstein nor Cuomo, the two biggest anti-gun pols at the moment, have even suggested banning private ownership of guns.
I would imagine that you could get more support for NAMBLA than you could for banning private ownership of guns in the US. So the slippery slope argument is tired and disingenuous.
There is absolutely no support for such a ban in the electorate, the politicians, or in any ideology. No one who has seriously considered the topic thinks a ban in the US is a good idea.
To think that this could happen is essentially to have lost all faith in your country. There is really no point in hanging up the American flag if you think confiscation is a possibility.
Yes, but the day that weapons are banned all gun owners are criminals, too. And we'll all go live on Candy Rock Mountain . . .
Yes.
Easier, yes. Easy, no. But more importantly, effective, no.
First, as it appeared that guns were becoming unpopular there would be a rash of reported robberies. My own house would likely be broken into shortly after the first congressional hearing that seriously discusses gun confiscation.
Yes, the police would know that many of these were fake, but there would not be enough manpower to handle them all.
And then there would be those who simply refused. The courts would be filled with them and they would be all over the news.
The way to remove all guns from a population is to go door to door and turn each home inside out in a very organized way. Beat those that resist and kill those who resist vehemently. Relying on registration is just stupid.
No, but responding to such a letter with a police report documenting the theft of your weapons would be an appropriate response.
Of the 300 million guns currently in the US I would imagine that less than 10% would be recovered through a registration database.
Again, to effectively remove the remainder would require a massive operation of door to door searches that are even less likely to occur than the initial banning. Even in Obama's America!
I would imagine that you could get more support for NAMBLA than you could for banning private ownership of guns in the US. So the slippery slope argument is tired and disingenuous.
There is absolutely no support for such a ban in the electorate, the politicians, or in any ideology. No one who has seriously considered the topic thinks a ban in the US is a good idea.
To think that this could happen is essentially to have lost all faith in your country. There is really no point in hanging up the American flag if you think confiscation is a possibility.
Yes, but the day that weapons are banned all gun owners are criminals, too. And we'll all go live on Candy Rock Mountain . . .
Yes.
Easier, yes. Easy, no. But more importantly, effective, no.
First, as it appeared that guns were becoming unpopular there would be a rash of reported robberies. My own house would likely be broken into shortly after the first congressional hearing that seriously discusses gun confiscation.
Yes, the police would know that many of these were fake, but there would not be enough manpower to handle them all.
And then there would be those who simply refused. The courts would be filled with them and they would be all over the news.
The way to remove all guns from a population is to go door to door and turn each home inside out in a very organized way. Beat those that resist and kill those who resist vehemently. Relying on registration is just stupid.
No, but responding to such a letter with a police report documenting the theft of your weapons would be an appropriate response.
Of the 300 million guns currently in the US I would imagine that less than 10% would be recovered through a registration database.
Again, to effectively remove the remainder would require a massive operation of door to door searches that are even less likely to occur than the initial banning. Even in Obama's America!
If you want to make a point about registration, don't use as your example something that needn't be registered.
Sabretooth
No Ordinary Rabbit
The highlighted is my main issue with his so-called empathy. The 2A has nothing to do with hunting and/or sportsmen.
Cuomo thinks strict NY gun control is his punch-card to the 2016 POTUS elections...no more, no less. People within his inner circle have been quoted as such.
The SAFE Act is a terrible law. If he was a smart politician at all, he'd learn to eat crow and repeal or revamp the entire thing. Instead, he's afraid he'll get egg on his face by backtracking. He doesn't even realize the SAFE Act is the egg on his face. His poll numbers have been in a steady nose-dive since January.
newyorkguy
Penultimate Amazing
Can you tell us when that happened? Was this a blanket order by the US Government, or a state action effecting one particular type of weapon?
So, would you be OK with confiscating all hunting and sporting weapons, but leaving those that would be suited to defending against the tyranny of government? Of course not. Therefore the 2A has lots do do with hunting and sportsmen and target shooters and collectors and guys who just want to have a gun, you know. Because if it doesn't, then it doesn't really do anything.
This . . .
Seems to have been contradicted by this . . .
Stupid democracy having stupid self correcting mechanisms already bult in. How are we to get truly afraid if we can just vote them out of office?
newyorkguy
Penultimate Amazing
As usual we start with one premise -- is any mainstream politician seriously proposing all guns be confiscated? -- and before you know it we're going off in another direction.
What would you have liked Cuomo to say? Sportsmen and hunters seems to pretty much cover it all. Because he didn't include"people who want to protect themselves?" Is that what you're alluding to?