What are the odds of confiscation?

[vikgorr]

Really?
Check again.
You may not be old enough to remember when "domestic violence" suddenly became a disqualifier for gun ownership. It was extended BACK to any prior conviction or plea or nolo plea with no exception.
DON'T get me wrong- I do NOT advocate or condone domestic violence. Period.
BUT, we suddenly had cops who had plead nolo to a charge of slapping their wives who were very suddenly disqualified from being cops OR even owning a gun.

I'm not sure why that was never overturned.
Does anyone know?

I've done some research on this subject. !996 law was challenged few times. It stands because it was ruled that restriction on possession of firearms does not constitute a punishment. And so it will be ruled in the future. I think this interpretation of Constitution is insulting, obnoxious, brazen misinterpretation. What can we do? Nothing until the next elections on any level. You get what you vote for. It seems that states governments lately started to listen to their voters.

 

[lagavulin62]

If it's a federal ban on assault weapons, I do not think you're going to see local LE going house-to-house picking up weapons. Most likely will be FBI, Homeland Security, or some other fed agency. Also, they're only acting on orders to confiscate so don't blame them. But we're getting ahead of ourselves here. There is nothing yet that says assault weapons have to be turned in.

"they're only acting on orders"? well this is the line of thinking the govt expects citizens to have. this is the point. if your best friend comes knocking at your door saying he is only doing his duty to confiscate your guns what are you going to do? well you are going to treat him just as he was a criminal intent on doing harm to your wife and children. and you will be justified because you know in your heart that the man had a choice of either remaining on the side of friends or working for the enemy. let's don't forget the SS were just doing their job. some of this talk of "doing their job" is just pathetic.

 

[COL Jagdog]

Really?
Check again.
You may not be old enough to remember when "domestic violence" suddenly became a disqualifier for gun ownership. It was extended BACK to any prior conviction or plea or nolo plea with no exception.
DON'T get me wrong- I do NOT advocate or condone domestic violence. Period.
BUT, we suddenly had cops who had plead nolo to a charge of slapping their wives who were very suddenly disqualified from being cops OR even owning a gun.

I'm not sure why that was never overturned.
Does anyone know?

Lee, if you want to hear something really crazy: the Lautenberg law requires that active duty military who have a domestic abuse issue (must be a conviction or guilty plea) cannot carry a weapon if deployed -- like you, I do not condone domestic violence, but to send a service member in harm's way without being able to carry a weapon is simply stupid. What actually ends up happening most times is that those service members end up not being deployed by their commanders (that deployment slot has to be backfilled by someone else) or they are quickly switched to a slot (even if not MOS-qualified) that does not require carrying a weapon --

 

[COL Jagdog]

"they're only acting on orders"? well this is the line of thinking the govt expects citizens to have. this is the point. if your best friend comes knocking at your door saying he is only doing his duty to confiscate your guns what are you going to do? well you are going to treat him just as he was a criminal intent on doing harm to your wife and children. and you will be justified because you know in your heart that the man had a choice of either remaining on the side of friends or working for the enemy. let's don't forget the SS were just doing their job. some of this talk of "doing their job" is just pathetic.

"I was just following orders" has never been a valid defense to engaging in illegal conduct -- we prosecuted many German and Japanese service members for "just following orders" to torture or kill POW's and/or civilians -- and quite a few got the death penalty.

If there is ever an attempt by our government to attempt confiscation, those in charge of the "confiscation forces" are going to have a huge moral and ethical and legal dilemma --
which is they may (after all of the dust settles, whether it is in the courts or in a new revolutionary war) be subject to prosecution -- there is precedent for this. If you know a law or an order is patently illegal, you have a legal duty to not enforce it -- this is textbook Geneva/Hague Convention stuff.
We prosecuted and convicted terrorists and insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan for engaging in terroristic acts (killings, bombings, attacks on troops aand civilians) which they (the bad guys) attempted attempted to justify based on fatwas (religious edicts/laws issued by Muslim clerics) or the Koran or sharia law --- simply put, no defense to criminal or illegal acts.

Violating the 2nd Amendment actually opens up those who violate it to both criminal and civil penalties, in my opinion, depending on the extent of the violative actions.
Interesting times we live in.

 

[COL Jagdog]

For those of you who think ex post facto will save your rifles, you either do not understand the liberal mentality or believe the Constitution means something to them as it does to you. As long as this country elects the left, the chances of confiscation riseas each day passes. Maybe not today, maybe not tomorrow, but it is coming. A good friend of mine who is in the Airfirce participated in an "ethics" seminar as part of his training, and he as well as others were asked what they would do if ordered to go house to house and comfiscate guns in this country. Don't think the military would do this, I suggest you look no further than New Orleans after Katrina. They did and it is well documented. The New Orleans police chief was and is on video saying only law enforcement would be armed in the aftermath. It is not paranoia, it is a remains a serious threat. If you do not believe the military will fire on civilians, look no further than kent state university. This incident gave rise to the Crosby, Stills, Nash song that echoed " four dead in Ohio. Not the first time our military has fired on civilians and probably not the last either.

Your history is incorrect -- the military in New Orleans did not confiscate weapons -- the NOPD did confiscate weapons and they were sued in federal court and the plaintiffs (gun owners) won the case, got their guns back and damages and attorneys fees paid.

 

[dwpmusic]

In my almost 30 years of military service I was always taught that you DID NOT have to obey an unlawful order. Now, it appears, that the crux of the matter is what and what not will be unlawful in the future. I personally don't think the actual confiscation of my weapons will take place in my lifetime. But, I'm a 66 year old guy. What do I know??

 

[Freeway]

Really?
Check again.
You may not be old enough to remember when "domestic violence" suddenly became a disqualifier for gun ownership. It was extended BACK to any prior conviction or plea or nolo plea with no exception.
DON'T get me wrong- I do NOT advocate or condone domestic violence. Period.
BUT, we suddenly had cops who had plead nolo to a charge of slapping their wives who were very suddenly disqualified from being cops OR even owning a gun.

I'm not sure why that was never overturned.
Does anyone know?

Not only were police officers removed from their jobs, many military personnel were discharged. Many of these people did not even have physical contact, and yet a single misdemeanor charge has taken away their RKBA.

Certain people should probably not possess firearms, but I believe that a single mistake (10, 20, or more years ago) should not be held against someone forever. Perhaps a "three strikes" rule would have been more logical.

I also wonder why it has not been overturned. There have been a couple of bills submitted, yet they all have "died" in committee.

 

[Delos]

Hammer them into plowshares

No....
I am going to begin rolling my high capacity magazines in fancy wraping paper to become picture frames to hang on the wall.
Legally once they are converted into something else they are something else? (maybe?)

 

[Ben Cartwright SASS]

Confiscation, not needed.

In Massachusetts the new gun bills call for in addition to everything else, mantatory liability insurance on all guns. You cannot keep them if they are not insured. The insurance will either be astronomically high, in the thousands a year, or non-existant when insurance companies say they will not take on the risk of insuring guns and those crazed gun owners.
Now with no insurance, and with all guns (handguns, rifles, shotguns) already registered in MA it is a simple thing to "allow" you to either sell them out of state (as was stated for the high cap mag ban, you will have 1 year to sell or turn in) or turn them in to the government.

There will be no confiscation, just people willingly turning them in to the state.

 

[squidsix]

It has happened already in NY. In one generation, all the military-styled rifles will be gone. One generation.

 

[Shinny]

We'll get the Affordable Gun Care Act

 

[cp1969]

I want to know how grandfathering squares with the "equal protection under the law" provided for in the 14th Amendment.

Joe Blow has an AR-15 with a 30 round magazine. That's OK, because he bought it the day before the law took effect.

I, on the other hand, am a felon if I take possession of the same equipment after the law takes effect.

What Joe is doing legally, is a felony if I do it. That doesn't sound like equal treatment to me.

 

[Joewisc]

I want to know how grandfathering squares with the "equal protection under the law" provided for in the 14th Amendment.

Joe Blow has an AR-15 with a 30 round magazine. That's OK, because he bought it the day before the law took effect.

I, on the other hand, am a felon if I take possession of the same equipment after the law takes effect.

What Joe is doing legally, is a felony if I do it. That doesn't sound like equal treatment to me.

Everything Hitler did was "legal" under German law at the time.

 

[OSYM8113]

What are the chances of them knocking on doors to take your guns away?

Very damn good. So good, it would be happening right now if the NY legislature had any less than the 20 minutes before midnight on a sunday provided to read the nonsense in that bill-

NY Democrat pleads with Republican not to share document proposing confiscation of guns - The Commentator

New York gun law affects state's cops, too | The Daily Caller