So the dreaded day arrives and they are coming for your guns

I am not a big 2nd amendment guy, I think that they are all equally important. Not just one of them. I hear people all day long proclaiming themselves patriots and about all the things they will do if someone dared come for their firearms.
It seems that my idea of a patriot and what others call a patriot are very different. Allow me to do define what I see as the basic 2nd amendment patriot.
The day comes when TPTB are able to pass gun control laws. It is official and they are coming for your guns, One day 2 black SUV's pull in front of your house, They are here to take your guns, Being the patriot you are you grab your 2 favorites and take your stand on your porch. The 2 American flags you have flying suddenly wrap themselves around you in breeze that surely came from the hand of God himself. You imagine that you can hear Stars and Striped Forever playing in the background. The men get out of their SUV's and approach you. You hold up your life size copy of the US Constitution and proclaim you have Rights, you warn them not to come any closer and to leave your property. The men who came to collect your guns realize that you are correct and leave making a note that you know your Rights and are not to be messed with. Oh what a patriot you are.
The reality is quite different. They will come to your house and you will give them your guns willingly, or you will perish. You might get a dumb idea and shoot one of them, or you might get lucky and end up in prison instead of dead. Either way they got your guns and your family is left to pick up the pieces. Still sound like a good idea to you? You do realize dead patriots cast no votes don't you?
If you are a patriot, then why do you wait for laws that you know they are trying to pass come to be? Get your 2nd amendment buddies together, have meetings with the NRA, and start doing NOW, what should have been done years ago.
Each state needs to figure out where their "Line in the sand" is. They need to do it while they still have time.
Legislation needs to be passed that clearly states any attempt to revoke a citizens 2nd amendment right will be followed by a vote of secession. With this in place ahead of time, they can't take your guns. If 20 states have this in place the whole country wins.
We all need to take the Constitution seriously enough to defend it, and to be prepared to go as far as leave the union to do so..
A patriot acts preemptively, he fights with votes. He protects those votes with muscats if need be., but first he gets laws passed in his state,because states are sovereign. He doesn't sit on his porch waiting for the worst, he prevents the worst from ever happening

What gun?
I don need no stinkin guns.

The premise here assumes the authorities coming to confiscate guns that are registered, and thus known to the authorities.

It does not consider the many guns out there, NOT registered, and thus NOT so easily subject to siezure.

Originally posted by ronnieray123
I am not a big 2nd amendment guy, I think that they are all equally important. Not just one of them. I hear people all day long proclaiming themselves patriots and about all the things they will do if someone dared come for their firearms.
It seems that my idea of a patriot and what others call a patriot are very different. Allow me to do define what I see as the basic 2nd amendment patriot.
The day comes when TPTB are able to pass gun control laws. It is official and they are coming for your guns, One day 2 black SUV's pull in front of your house, They are here to take your guns, Being the patriot you are you grab your 2 favorites and take your stand on your porch. The 2 American flags you have flying suddenly wrap themselves around you in breeze that surely came from the hand of God himself. You imagine that you can hear Stars and Striped Forever playing in the background. The men get out of their SUV's and approach you. You hold up your life size copy of the US Constitution and proclaim you have Rights, you warn them not to come any closer and to leave your property. The men who came to collect your guns realize that you are correct and leave making a note that you know your Rights and are not to be messed with. Oh what a patriot you are.
The reality is quite different. They will come to your house and you will give them your guns willingly, or you will perish. You might get a dumb idea and shoot one of them, or you might get lucky and end up in prison instead of dead. Either way they got your guns and your family is left to pick up the pieces. Still sound like a good idea to you? You do realize dead patriots cast no votes don't you?
If you are a patriot, then why do you wait for laws that you know they are trying to pass come to be? Get your 2nd amendment buddies together, have meetings with the NRA, and start doing NOW, what should have been done years ago.
Each state needs to figure out where their "Line in the sand" is. They need to do it while they still have time.
Legislation needs to be passed that clearly states any attempt to revoke a citizens 2nd amendment right will be followed by a vote of secession. With this in place ahead of time, they can't take your guns. If 20 states have this in place the whole country wins.
We all need to take the Constitution seriously enough to defend it, and to be prepared to go as far as leave the union to do so..
A patriot acts preemptively, he fights with votes. He protects those votes with muscats if need be., but first he gets laws passed in his state,because states are sovereign. He doesn't sit on his porch waiting for the worst, he prevents the worst from ever happening

Ok, very funny. Would you like to tell me and the rest of us why the second amendment exists. Tell me what its purpose is and why our for-fathers chose to enact it. Then you might make more sense.

However, I am forced to agree that if the government decides to ban guns, it is not going to go over very well at all ...

I guess its hard for a coward to imagine dying for what one beleives in

Originally posted by crawdad1914
The premise here assumes the authorities coming to confiscate guns that are registered, and thus known to the authorities.

It does not consider the many guns out there, NOT registered, and thus NOT so easily subject to siezure.

edit on 1-8-2012 by crawdad1914 because: clarification

No kidding. Just about everybody I know have guns that are not registered.

Will they be knocking on every door to confiscate? Hell would freeze over before that could be accomplished!

american society is so splintered that any organized resistance is impossible.

in america, the only thing that there is more of than guns, are opinions.

reply to post by crawdad1914


I wish I could agree with your point because it would make me feel a lot better. The minute you bought 1 bullet, or anything to do with reloading shells you will get busted, and punished.
No my friend, the answer is not hiding, it is not acting covertly. The answer is for your state to say loud and proud that restricting any of the Rights our Founding Fathers guaranteed us will result in secession being brought before the people for ballot. Then you know who your friends are and who are your enemies. Every state that adopts this type of legislation identifies itself to the others as a friend. If you have enough friends on your side.....bullies leave you alone

reply to post by crawdad1914


Exactly what happened in the UK. Only criminals have pistols now.

reply to post by VI0811


The second amendment exists because our founding fathers voted.....and the powers that be told them to go screw themselves, So we backed up our votes with guns.
First the people vote.....then we fight if need be, not the other way around

Originally posted by randomname
american society is so splintered that any organized resistance is impossible.

in america, the only thing that there is more of than guns, are opinions.

Splintered in some ways yes, but not on this issue. You want to see America quickly become a battle zone similar to (name your favorite middle eastern country) ,come for its guns.

The resistance will form rather quickly. It will be brutal.

I shoot them if they tried to take my guns.

I have my doubts that would happen though.... Do you really think the Federal employees would do that or would we be lucky enough that they would tell them to "go to hell!"

We have a right and a responsibility to shoot and if need be, kill anyone who attempts to take our guns.

In the end, it's not about having guns only that are used for hunting..... it's about making sure the PEOPLE are armed well enough that NO government even thinks about taking our guns.

Just think about the first person that shoots them, everyone will be doing it and it just wouldn't work. Too many Patriots to allow this to happen.

Who the hell wants a registered gun anyway....? Not i...

reply to post by Sulie


Just where exactly are you gonna buy bullets from if there are no more legal guns? Walmarts? come on you guys think through the topic thoroughly, know your enemy better than that.

Our power is in enacting laws that say cross this line and we are outta here, The federal Branch cant live without ALL the tax dollars...we can win but not with bullets,

Originally posted by Wide-Eyes
reply to post by crawdad1914

 

Exactly what happened in the UK. Only criminals have pistols now.

Different countrys, different mindsets. The right to bare arms is ingrained in our country, like possibly none other.
Some will willingly give them up, of course but not enough to quell a rebellion.

In reading the US Constitution and 2nd Amendment it seems the framers were looking at the Right to Bear Arms as more for maintaining MIlitias.

Section 8 reads: To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years; and

To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions; and

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

So, they relied more on MIlitias for the defense of the country.

Now, the 2nd Amendment reads: 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.

Tells me that the framers of the Constitution, in order to ensure we had a well regulated militia and a ready populace, wanted to ensure that the people had weapons. Instead of a small army being fed and supported by the government, the entire populace could be mobilized at any given time to defend the Nation.

As for the Government coming for our guns...I don't buy into the hype. Gun sales seem to go up when there is talk of restricting the 2nd Amendment. Perhaps the real conspiracy is with gun manufacturers who tell us are rights are being violated to boost sales.

Good point, I am sure that was repeated in countries all over the world right up until the collected the last gun.
If there is no real chance of it happening here, then there should be no problem voting for a law like I spoke of,,,,because it would never happen here,
Would it not be interesting though to see how the Federal Branch reacted to such laws being voted on and passed by the people. Do you think they would be sitting in Washington saying It's no big deal, we would never pass a law like that anyways

reply to post by Feltrick


Some court rulings on the 2nd ammendment clarifying exactly what the right to bare arms means in terms of the citizenry protecting itself, and property and not simply in the form of an "organized militia"

caselaw.lp.findlaw.com...
2nd Amendment Annotations

Prior to the Supreme Court's 2008 decision in District of Columbia v. Heller,1 the courts had yet to definitively state what right the Second Amendment protected. The opposing theories, perhaps oversimplified, were (1) an "individual rights" approach, whereby the Amendment protected individuals' rights to firearm ownership, possession, and transportation; and (2) a "states' rights" approach, under which the Amendment only protected the right to keep and bear arms in connection with organized state militia units.2 Moreover, it was generally believed that the Amendment was only a bar to federal action, not to state or municipal restraints.3

However, the Supreme Court has now definitively held that the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that weapon for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home. Moreover, this right applies not just to the federal government, but to states and municipalities as well.

In Heller, the Court held that (1) the District of Columbia's total ban on handgun possession in the home amounted to a prohibition on an entire class of "arms" that Americans overwhelmingly chose for the lawful purpose of self-defense, and thus violated the Second Amendment; and (2) the District's requirement that any lawful firearm in the home be disassembled or bound by a trigger lock also violated the Second Amendment, because the law made it impossible for citizens to use arms for the core lawful purpose of self-defense.

The Court reasoned that the Amendment's prefatory clause, i.e., "[a] well regulated

Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State," announced the Amendment's purpose, but did not limit or expand the scope of the operative clause, i.e., "the

right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." Moreover, the prefatory clause's history comported with the Court's interpretation, because the prefatory clause stemmed from the Anti-Federalists' concern that the federal government would disarm the people in order to disable the citizens' militia, enabling a politicized standing army or a select militia to rule.

Further, the Court distinguished United States v.Miller,4 in which the Court upheld a statute requiring registration under the National Firearms Act of sawed-off shotguns, on the ground that Miller limited the type of weapon to which the Second Amendment right applied to those in common use for lawful purposes.

In McDonald v. Chicago,5 the Court struck down laws enacted by Chicago and the village of Oak Park effectively banning handgun possession by almost all private citizens, holding that the Fourteenth Amendment incorporated the Second Amendment right, recognized in Heller, to keep and bear arms for the purpose of self-defense.

The Court reasoned that this right is fundamental to the nation's scheme of ordered liberty, given that self-defense was a basic right recognized by many legal systems from ancient times to the present, and Heller held that individual self-defense was "the central component" of the Second Amendment right. Moreover, a survey of the contemporaneous history also demonstrated clearly that the Fourteenth Amendment's Framers and ratifiers counted the right to keep and bear arms among those fundamental rights necessary to the Nation's system of ordered liberty.

As i said in my original post, I am not a big 2nd amendment guy.....but the truth is I am a big 10th amendment guy.
You restore the 10th and everything else falls into place

Originally posted by randomname
american society is so splintered that any organized resistance is impossible.

in america, the only thing that there is more of than guns, are opinions.

If it was an organized resistance it would be easy to destroy.

Guerilla warfare and small pockets of resistance would be very hard to defeat even for the most competent, advanced military.

If the second amendment goes the constitution (and any semblance of freedom we enjoy) will be gone too. The sole purpose of the second is to make sure the constitution is protected.