PDA

View Full Version : Gun registration, licensing and tracking.


nicki
07-12-2011, 2:48 PM
Many people post about the registration and confiscation and off course the issue now is the ATF and the "Gunrunner scandal".

And let's not forget the UN and the Small Arms treaty.

To me the simple solution is the following, build your own gun(s).

Hell, some people would probably violate the law and build copies of commercial guns they got and put matching stamps and serial numbers, then turn in the cheap copy gun.

If the US government did ban possession of privately owned guns, what they would do is ask us to turn them in first, like they did in Australia and England first.

If you go and "bury your guns", they have effectively disarmed you since you will not be able to access your guns when you need them.

Use a "illegal gun" for defense against a "Criminal", go directly to jail.

My point being is if this is something you are concerned about, get involved so that this won't happen in the first place.

Nicki

Cowboy T
07-12-2011, 3:08 PM
If the US government did ban possession of privately owned guns, what they would do is ask us to turn them in first, like they did in Australia and England first.


If that came to pass--and that's a big "if", given the 2A's existence--they likely wouldn't "ask" us. Rather, they'd do like they did with the jackbooted thugs in New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina.

There is reported to be one neighborhood down there that those jackboots didn't invade like that. This neighborhood, armed to the teeth, apparently had been tipped off and had gotten ready. I understand that at least one of the residents had a .50 BMG, and that there were many .308 Wins, .30-06's, etc. The jackboots showed up with their M-16's, saw all that firepower pointed at them, and decided "hmm...maybe not, let's go elsewhere."

Sounds exactly like what the Founding Fathers had in mind when they wrote the 2A. Just replace "British troops" with "jackbooted thugs", and it's an eerie parallel, isn't it?


My point being is if this is something you are concerned about, get involved so that this won't happen in the first place.
Nicki

And that's why we have organizations like CalGuns, CCRKBA, VCDL, etc. This is why we should support our local pro-2A organizations. This is also why we should advocate reloading our own ammo. Remember AB 962....

rshoemaker
07-12-2011, 3:56 PM
another reason I am a proponate of the oath keepers. Those jackbooted thugs are supposed to defend the constitution not piss on it.

five.five-six
07-12-2011, 4:00 PM
if you are not doing anything wrong, I don't see where you have anything to worry about. wouldn't only guilty people be opposed to licensing and tracking?

taperxz
07-12-2011, 4:09 PM
if you are not doing anything wrong, I don't see where you have anything to worry about. wouldn't only guilty people be opposed to licensing and tracking?

I think the point is that the government would have direct knowledge of your personal property and therefore knock on your door to take your guns.

Unregistered guns would be impossible to locate. It would make it harder for the government to effectively collect guns.

luckystrike
07-12-2011, 6:17 PM
hmm. how long do ffls keep dros for longguns?

repubconserv
07-12-2011, 7:20 PM
if you are not doing anything wrong, I don't see where you have anything to worry about. wouldn't only guilty people be opposed to licensing and tracking?



http://forum.bodybuilding.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=1831341&stc=1&d=1242858412

cadurand
07-12-2011, 8:54 PM
if you are not doing anything wrong, I don't see where you have anything to worry about. wouldn't only guilty people be opposed to licensing and tracking?I would pose the same question to you. If I'm not doing anything wrong, why does the government need to be able to track my firearm?

Big Dog Howie
07-12-2011, 10:46 PM
:(if you are not doing anything wrong, I don't see where you have anything to worry about. wouldn't only guilty people be opposed to licensing and tracking?
I guess you are not old enough to remember Nazi Germany:(

EBR Works
07-12-2011, 11:20 PM
hmm. how long do ffls keep dros for longguns?


3 years for California DROS records. 20 years for the ATF form 4473.

xXRifleManXx
07-12-2011, 11:23 PM
Many people post about the registration and confiscation and off course the issue now is the ATF and the "Gunrunner scandal".

And let's not forget the UN and the Small Arms treaty.

To me the simple solution is the following, build your own gun(s).

Hell, some people would probably violate the law and build copies of commercial guns they got and put matching stamps and serial numbers, then turn in the cheap copy gun.

If the US government did ban possession of privately owned guns, what they would do is ask us to turn them in first, like they did in Australia and England first.

If you go and "bury your guns", they have effectively disarmed you since you will not be able to access your guns when you need them.

Use a "illegal gun" for defense against a "Criminal", go directly to jail.

My point being is if this is something you are concerned about, get involved so that this won't happen in the first place.

Nicki
^^^smart lady ^^^^

radioman
07-13-2011, 12:20 AM
I might live long enough to see the revolt after all.:mad:

rjh4758
07-13-2011, 1:39 AM
If they just straight up came knocking right away, there would be a lot of trouble. People will be fighting mad at first. If only .01%, thats 1/100 of 1 percent, of the 80 million gun owners fight back with the gun grabbers that would be 8,000 Waco's.

So the only way it would happen is:

1 Ammo supply cut off

2.They would ask for voluntary surrender

3.Then things would cool and after you have calmed they would come knocking, most likely a year or two had passed by then.

I can not see an immediate gun seizure like in other countries. There are 80,000,000 gun owners in the US, imagine the revolts that would happen. They will slowly erode the second amendment until we can not even buy a BB gun and then wait for us to run out of ammo.

Just remember the second amendment:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Free State - guns = no free state

The second amendment is there to prevent tyranny like that which was endured under British rule.


http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y15/rjh4758/1308893700.jpg

Wherryj
07-13-2011, 8:45 AM
If they just straight up came knocking right away, there would be a lot of trouble. People will be fighting mad at first. If only .01%, thats 1/100 of 1 percent, of the 80 million gun owners fight back with the gun grabbers that would be 8,000 Waco's.

So the only way it would happen is:

1 Ammo supply cut off

2.They would ask for voluntary surrender

3.Then things would cool and after you have calmed they would come knocking, most likely a year or two had passed by then.

I can not see an immediate gun seizure like in other countries. There are 80,000,000 gun owners in the US, imagine the revolts that would happen. They will slowly erode the second amendment until we can not even buy a BB gun and then wait for us to run out of ammo.

Just remember the second amendment:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Free State - guns = no free state

The second amendment is there to prevent tyranny like that which was endured under British rule.


http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y15/rjh4758/1308893700.jpg

I can't see cutting off the ammo supply as any sort of guarantee of success for the government, however. There are a lot of people with quite a bit more ammunition on hand than would be needed for immediate use-and I suspect that the lack of trips to the range would allow said ammunition to last a bit longer.

Then there are those with significant amounts of power and reloading supplies...

Wernher von Browning
07-13-2011, 11:18 AM
So the only way it would happen is:

1 Ammo supply cut off
...
They will slowly erode the second amendment until we can not even buy a BB gun and then wait for us to run out of ammo.




Yes. Or the recent "shortage" of primers. (If a couple of little pissant non-wars put that much stress on the military ammunition supply, what happens when -- not if -- there is a major military confrontation?)

One might be able (with difficulty) to form one's own brass, and cast one's own bullets, but without primers and powder, you're pretty much out of business. Sure, you can make blackpowder, but at that point you might as well switch to crossbows.

The idea of hiding the guns "until you really, REALLY, I mean it this time" need them, is wishful thinking too. If you can't legally go out to the range to practice in the meantime, your ability to do anything useful with them "when the time comes" is going to be seriously degraded.

five.five-six
07-13-2011, 9:46 PM
who are you going to use them against? the police? the army? who?

Knight_Who_Says_Ni
07-13-2011, 11:07 PM
who are you going to use them against? the police? the army? who?

You pose a great point. You cannot fight back when outgunned, its just stupid. I think the logical way is to penetrate the antis and destroy them from within.

misterjake
07-14-2011, 12:07 AM
You pose a great point. You cannot fight back when outgunned, its just stupid. I think the logical way is to penetrate the antis and destroy them from within.

With AIDS?

Your response sounded sexual, sorry. :o

InGrAM
07-14-2011, 2:05 AM
LOL yes! AIDS!!!! and then nuke them from space. "it's the only way to be sure".

rjh4758
07-14-2011, 7:13 AM
who are you going to use them against? the police? the army? who?

They only way would be a large organized revolt on Washington. But the key is organized and that would be unlikely to happen.

SupportGeek
07-14-2011, 8:59 AM
It would be difficult in this day and age to motivate people to take that next step into armed revolt in significant numbers. On top of that, even if you could get as many together as possible so that it would matter, it would be impossible to prevent government security agencies from discovering it in its nascent stages and infiltrating it at the least, assaulting it in its infancy is even more likely.

Knight_Who_Says_Ni
07-14-2011, 2:56 PM
With AIDS?

Your response sounded sexual, sorry. :o

I had a feeling someone was gonna take it that way... :D

jwkincal
07-14-2011, 3:10 PM
But the Feds wouldn't get all the guns... they wouldn't even get a small fraction of them (even of the recorded ones, who knows how many are not on any record anywhere). And they would know it. Then they would have this quandary about "We're supposed to have everyone disarmed and we know that we don't... now what do we do? Pretend?"

There would be a lot of hand-wringing about the missing guns. And some folks in the government would get scared. And then the government's own organization would start to become fragmented. And then things would start to get really interesting. And then the folks who held onto the guns would be glad they did.

donw
07-14-2011, 3:49 PM
If that came to pass--and that's a big "if", given the 2A's existence--they likely wouldn't "ask" us. Rather, they'd do like they did with the jackbooted thugs in New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina.

There is reported to be one neighborhood down there that those jackboots didn't invade like that. This neighborhood, armed to the teeth, apparently had been tipped off and had gotten ready. I understand that at least one of the residents had a .50 BMG, and that there were many .308 Wins, .30-06's, etc. The jackboots showed up with their M-16's, saw all that firepower pointed at them, and decided "hmm...maybe not, let's go elsewhere."

Sounds exactly like what the Founding Fathers had in mind when they wrote the 2A. Just replace "British troops" with "jackbooted thugs", and it's an eerie parallel, isn't it?



And that's why we have organizations like CalGuns, CCRKBA, VCDL, etc. This is why we should support our local pro-2A organizations. This is also why we should advocate reloading our own ammo. Remember AB 962....

keep in mind: LEA/LE/legislators do NOT like to be beaten/bested/proven wrong, in or out of court.

i heard of an, alleged, incident, here in the socal, desert, in a popular off road recreation area, a local deputy was investigating a disturbance and when attempting to break up the "disturbance" was thoroughly thrashed, and disarmed, by the participants.

he, allegedly, left and never returned...

i seriously doubt any LEA would stand for that. if necessary, they would call in the NG. :(

thenodnarb
07-14-2011, 6:38 PM
keep in mind: LEA/LE/legislators do NOT like to be beaten/bested/proven wrong, in or out of court.

i heard of an, alleged, incident, here in the socal, desert, in a popular off road recreation area, a local deputy was investigating a disturbance and when attempting to break up the "disturbance" was thoroughly thrashed, and disarmed, by the participants.

he, allegedly, left and never returned...

i seriously doubt any LEA would stand for that. if necessary, they would call in the NG. :(

I know of TWO similar stories. The first was from my home town, here in california. A particularly a-holeish CHP officer who was well known for being an a-hole, had been harassing ordinary citizens for stupid violations for years. One night, just outside of the local watering hole, he was dragged from his car, disarmed, pulled into a van, had the **** beaten out of him, and was dropped off in a parking lot down the road. He requested a transfer. To my knowledge, no one was arrested.

Second story comes from a small town near where I work. This town is well known for being anti-government. The County looked the other way when it came to this community for a long time. One day, a health inspector decides to investigate one of the businesses, probably due to a report of a violation(which is likely). The owner refused to cooperate and things must have got heated because the owner chased the agent off his property with a gun(supposedly a bb gun). I fully expected for him to be arrested. Nothing came of it. Since then, for other reasons, we now have the health inspectors visiting regularly.

You would think that a no tolerance reaction would come from the local Sheriff's office, but alas, nothing. Both these stories occurred in San Bernardino County in unincorporated areas, which may be the common factor here. SB County Sheriff Deputies seem to be pretty good guys, and very reasonable with a few exceptions. I don't think they want to piss off ordinary citizens, but they still deal with criminals the way they should.

thenodnarb
07-14-2011, 6:52 PM
Many people post about the registration and confiscation and off course the issue now is the ATF and the "Gunrunner scandal".

And let's not forget the UN and the Small Arms treaty.

To me the simple solution is the following, build your own gun(s).

Hell, some people would probably violate the law and build copies of commercial guns they got and put matching stamps and serial numbers, then turn in the cheap copy gun.

If the US government did ban possession of privately owned guns, what they would do is ask us to turn them in first, like they did in Australia and England first.

If you go and "bury your guns", they have effectively disarmed you since you will not be able to access your guns when you need them.

Use a "illegal gun" for defense against a "Criminal", go directly to jail.

My point being is if this is something you are concerned about, get involved so that this won't happen in the first place.

Nicki

You've got the right idea as to how they would likely proceed. As non-confrontational as possible while singling out individuals over the next 2-10-or 20 years.

However, remember this: The Military is loyal to US, the citizens. I think there are very few generals who would obey any orders from the president to take disarming actions against citizens. Even Hitler had to assemble a civilian security force to take the actions he did within the country. He sent the military to war. Same thing happens here. Send our boys to war over there, while we militarize the police force here to perpetrate actions against the citizens. I know the military has conducted training in US cities, but that is now where a general would take a stand. He would take a stand against the POTUS when actual orders are given to disarm people.


Here's something to think about: Governments only want to disarm their populations when they want to accomplish something that the population would violently resist. So, in our case, why does the government want to disarm us? What is their goal here? What can't they accomplish while we are still armed? I don't believe the hippie do-gooder reasons. It is obviously nefarious. Something to ponder.