Noah Vaile
Member
No one should know how many or what guns you own or carry.
It is no one's business but your own.
It is no one's business but your own.
Should the FBI Know How Many Guns You Own?
- Thread starter DeadManWalking
- Start date
Maximumbob54
Member
- Joined
- Oct 2, 2010
- Messages
- 7,202
- Reaction score
- 1,928
No. There, that was an easy one.
They're not going to come and get every gun the same day, so they don't need millions of agents. They'll start by getting "evil" guns from "evil" people. They already started this by prohibiting felons(who served their time) from having guns, and banning production certain types of common weapons. Then just keep expanding it, little by little(misdemeanor domestic violence), until it includes everyone. Of course they also have the entire network of state and local law enforcement to help speed things along.
jtpur
Member
Australia
Australia did not have gun rights in their constitution. Gun ownership in Australia was low before the ban. The number of guns turned in was under 700,000.....the ban did not include all guns, and those needing a gun could apply for exception.
Our gun rights are protected by our constitution.
My math was in response to the FBI collecting guns...
Gun laws are not new in the US, some towns did not allow guns to be carried even back in the wild west of the late
1800's. Visitors turned their guns in with the local police or sheriff.
Australia did not have gun rights in their constitution. Gun ownership in Australia was low before the ban. The number of guns turned in was under 700,000.....the ban did not include all guns, and those needing a gun could apply for exception.
Our gun rights are protected by our constitution.
My math was in response to the FBI collecting guns...
Gun laws are not new in the US, some towns did not allow guns to be carried even back in the wild west of the late
1800's. Visitors turned their guns in with the local police or sheriff.
jtpur
Member
Right and I trust the government about as far as I can throw the government. I put nothing past them and I remember the words of our dearly beloved President as he was campaining....not an exact quote but close I am sure..." We must have a civillian defense force as well equipped and as large as our Military forces.!!!!"""""" and not one idiot in the media asked him what he meant...so I shall assume the worst.... 700,000 guns might be the average number in a Texas household....
While I disagree with some of your posting above, I agree that it would not happen in a day. And as you alluded to, the Feds have the ability to call in the National Guard, the other military branches as well as the various states police forces.
What one should worry about is keeping the Feds at bay when it comes to firearms.
bk43
Member
Posse comitatus prohibits use of the military within the borders of the United States. The respective National Guard forces report to the governors of the various states and cannot be used by the federal government and of course state police agencies report to the state officials. What you're talking about is not possible.
Bob
Aside from the impossible logistics of this issue what creditable information do you have that says the Federal Gov't wants to come to your house and take away your guns? One piece of legislation signed by Pres. Obama allows guns in national parks. Does that sound like gun control? Where is the legislation your fear? If you believe that some un-named sinister force is going to search 130 million homes and confiscate all of the guns, you are talking about the collapse of our federal government.
This would go against the stated position of the Supreme Court and violate the Constitution in several ways.
Currently the NRA is finding increasing support from the Democratic side, while the administration is getting heat from the anti gun lobby for it's lack of action. The anti gun lobby has difficulty even meeting with the current administration.
Having said all of this in the very near future you will see legislation designed to keep firearms from mentally ill, in response to the Tucson shootings. Recent legislation re gun sales to those on the terrorist watch list was defeated.
We have been hearing about gun control for 30-40 years.
If you fear and distrust your government get involved and change things.
This would go against the stated position of the Supreme Court and violate the Constitution in several ways.
Currently the NRA is finding increasing support from the Democratic side, while the administration is getting heat from the anti gun lobby for it's lack of action. The anti gun lobby has difficulty even meeting with the current administration.
Having said all of this in the very near future you will see legislation designed to keep firearms from mentally ill, in response to the Tucson shootings. Recent legislation re gun sales to those on the terrorist watch list was defeated.
We have been hearing about gun control for 30-40 years.
If you fear and distrust your government get involved and change things.
HR5122 The John Warner Defense Authorization Act of 2007- Signed 10/17/2006 : "Gives the president the power to use the armed forces to restore public order in any state of the United States" Go to H.R. 5122 [109th] on Thomas . That is the original source and gives all the gory details. Interestingly it was the buzz in the liberal web sites because it was believed ( by them ) that Bush was going to impose martial law and NOT leave office when the "chosen one" would take office. If you google Posse Comitatus you will find the link. Back to the question : NO Any "law" that would prevent the "mentally ill" from obtaining firearms legally would prevent "everyone" from obtaining a firearm. Yes we could have a "registration" of prohibited persons, what is the definition of mentally ill?? Unfortunately every person could fall into the medico-legal definition. There may be signs/symptoms but they are not always recognized. Remember the movie " minority Report " they were going to stop a crime before it happened. Current 4473's ask if you have been confined to mental institution... RIGHT!!! Just like every murderer waits for the Police!! Be Safe.
bk43
Member
What you're refering to was repealed within a year, with everything reverting back to the original Insurrection Act. You can't just blow through Google and think you've found the source of all truth and light in 5 minutes. Try again.
Bob
HR 5122
Some nasty stuff went down under W's watch....HR 5122
does go on to say "when public order has been lost ,etc.."
the Military Commission Act of 2006 is another gem.
Don't recall any thing about W using HR5122 to stay in office . He was ready run to TX when the economy tanked.
Some nasty stuff went down under W's watch....HR 5122
does go on to say "when public order has been lost ,etc.."
the Military Commission Act of 2006 is another gem.
Don't recall any thing about W using HR5122 to stay in office . He was ready run to TX when the economy tanked.
BoB Thank You. I had tried to find more information lib/con sites and did not find anything about the repeal. I appreciate you correcting my ignorance. Be Safe.
Bet me. It happened in Katrina. The National Guard and the US Army was called in to keep peace, seize weapons and make arrest. You are correct that State Police report to the Governor is their respective state but if it involves Federal Law then they have to enforce it, no matter who is governor or President.
FWIW: We had US military people with supplies on hold at Barksdale AFB waiting for Gov Blanco to sign papers so Pres Bush could move them into New Orleans after Katrina. She would not do so until she had to because she was a Dem and Bush was a Republican. By the time the troops were moved in, things were already out of control. But the troops were what went door to door searching and seizing weapons.
I thought we had an amendment covering search and seizure but truck loads of guns were taken out of homes without search warrants and destroyed. A President, Governor or Mayor can order what they want and deal with the courts later.
In December 2008 CHP and US Marines worked together to do sobriety checks in San Bernardino Valley, Ca. You can google chp/ marines traffic stops. It was reported that the MP's were only there as observers!! If you travel outside of the US to Europe, South America, Mideast you will see a large military presence at airports. I know what the law is supposed to be, the question is how willing and easily will the gov cross the line. Something to consider. Be Safe.
bk43
Member
Nope. The US Army did support work like communications, etc. The First Army, supported by the Fifth, did search and rescue, communications, logistics, etc, type of support. Enforcement was the National Guard who reported to Governor Blanco. You are confusing the National Guard, the various police agencies and the US Army. They are not the same thing.
In passing, some paratroopers did join national Guard units in patroling the streets but they did so under Guard command, not the Army. The chain of command issue was the biggest problem Honore faced and has been much discussed since the storm. This discussion is often confused by faulty recollections of what actually happened after Katrina. Your memory of who was staged at Barksdale and where and what they were deployed actually doing is a good example. You're not even close to what actually happened.
Bob
Sorry but I was there four days before this went down.
As to Honore, the best I remember is he was a Lt Gen and Commander of the First Army. He had the power pretty much to do as he felt best and I think he did a good job but he dealt with many things and law enforcement was one of them.
And look where Honore is now and who he works for.
Now as to the gun confiscation, here is a good article by David Kopel that should be read. Notice who all went door to door collecting guns.
http://reason.com/archives/2005/09/10/defenseless-on-the-bayou
Last edited:
bk43
Member
Old man, first, Honore was commander of Joint Task Force Katrina which was charged with relief efforts. There is nothing about law enforcement involved there.
In the Kopel article you again are having trouble seeing the difference between regular army and the national guard. You need to read the article yourself and just try harder to understand the difference between the police, national guard and regular army. Until you do you'll keep getting mixed up as to who did what after Katrina.
Bob
In the Kopel article you again are having trouble seeing the difference between regular army and the national guard. You need to read the article yourself and just try harder to understand the difference between the police, national guard and regular army. Until you do you'll keep getting mixed up as to who did what after Katrina.
Bob
Similar threads
- Locked
