• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

How Mass Gun Confiscation Would Work

If I had a nickel for every preacher that said the end of the world was near.
 
Bum said:
It would be pre-empted my millions of unfortunate "lost overboard" accidents involving firearms.

Never happen, but it makes for great dystopian reading.
Click to expand...
Lakes are DEEP out here!
 
OpportunityCost said:
And you have the stones to say no one is coming for your guns. So much hypocrisy, so much.
Click to expand...

Restricting the bearing of arms to private property is not "coming for your guns"

Someone needs a dictionary

What possible objection would gun owners have to that ?
 
I thought gun stores were only supposed to keep ATF form 4473 for a certain, fairly short, period of time?

There's a million glaring holes in that opinion piece, btw.
 
Rich2018 said:
Restricting the bearing of arms to private property is not "coming for your guns"

Someone needs a dictionary

What possible objection would gun owners have to that ?
Click to expand...

Nah, utterly breaking the right completely, who could be possibly be bothered.

Utterly tyrannical and authoritarian. Your proposals are disgusting as is the ease with which you lie about them.
 
Lursa said:
I thought gun stores were only supposed to keep ATF form 4473 for a certain, fairly short, period of time?

There's a million glaring holes in that opinion piece, btw.
Click to expand...
Yes. I think the workaround is gun shops that fail or go out of business are required to turn their records over to the bATFe with no stipulations. Plus my guess is when they 'visit' to see if everything is in order, probably photograph all they can get away with.
 
zsu2357 said:
Yes. I think the workaround is gun shops that fail or go out of business are required to turn their records over to the bATFe with no stipulations. Plus my guess is when they 'visit' to see if everything is in order, probably photograph all they can get away with.
Click to expand...
Arghhh! Well, I cant say I ever completely believed they were always destroyed. There had to be "workarounds."
 
OpportunityCost said:
Nah, utterly breaking the right completely, who could be possibly be bothered.

Utterly tyrannical and authoritarian. Your proposals are disgusting as is the ease with which you lie about them.
Click to expand...


How is restricting bearing arms to private property, "breaking" the right to bear arms ?

How is this "authoritarian" ?

Why are they "disgusting" ?

You still get to bear arms...but well away from other people

It's a win : win
I should've thought of it before.
 
Rich2018 said:
Restricting the bearing of arms to private property is not "coming for your guns"

Someone needs a dictionary

What possible objection would gun owners have to that ?
Click to expand...
Better solution is to allow gun owners to exercise their rights and if you are someone who doesn't want to be around guns then you are free to stay in your home and not allow any guns in it. What possible objection could any anti rights promoter have?
 
AGENT J said:
1.) none of them did, you didnt provided anything to refute LMAO . . .nothign you posted proved confiscation would be easy . . .nothing
2.) LMAO please don't start posting flat out lies because Ill destroy them too lol .. as i already posted my point was that the majority of guns i have I didnt buy so theres no form saying i did . .post 51 . . try to keep up ;)
3.) no diversion at all, we are still in the same spot .you posted ZERO facts that proves confiscation would be "easy", you havent even made a valid argument yet . . .zero .. once again let me know when that reality changes LMAO

😁 🍿
Click to expand...
Whatever makes you feel better about having no rebuttal for the facts I laid out.
You didn't even know there was a federal firearm form.
If you ever want to try to to make a rebuttal..I'll be here. ;)🍿
 
Rich2018 said:
Restricting the bearing of arms to private property is not "coming for your guns"

Someone needs a dictionary

What possible objection would gun owners have to that ?
Click to expand...
This is another example of why you have no credibility.
 
jaeger19 said:
1.)Whatever makes you feel better about having no rebuttal for the facts I laid out.
2.)You didn't even know there was a federal firearm form.
3.) If you ever want to try to to make a rebuttal..I'll be here. ;)🍿
Click to expand...
BOOM!!!! another dodge LMAO
1.) has nothing to do with FEELINGS thats why your claims keep failing. You liad out ZERO facts that show it would be easy. If you disagree I directly challenge you to present them now. you cant
2.) no matter how many times you repeat this retard lie it will never be true as already proven in post #51 😂
3.) good then you can provide one fact that will magically make it "easy" . . we are waiting 🍿

I bet you dodge this AGAIN . . . .
 
Chillfolks said:
Better solution is to allow gun owners to exercise their rights and if you are someone who doesn't want to be around guns then you are free to stay in your home and not allow any guns in it. What possible objection could any anti rights promoter have?
Click to expand...

What's so wrong with exercising those rights on private property ?

I mean if a tyrant did take over the USA, you'd be free to then leave your property with your guns and stop him.

Win : Win
 
jaeger19 said:
This is another example of why you have no credibility.
Click to expand...

Says the guy who claims to be the owner of a livestock farm, a former reservist policeman, a former part-owner of a gun store, with a medical degree and teaches students and counsels patients...

And he wonders why no-one takes him seriously.
 
Rich2018 said:
I guess some do and some don't

If I was a cop, I'd be very much against the general public being armed and able to shoot at me.
Click to expand...
99.9999% of the general public that are legally allowed to own guns do not shoot at police. It's the tiny percentage of the others and the FELONS who break the law by possessing guns that police have to worry about. My right to defend myself with a firearm against criminals with firearms should not be infringed because a tiny percentage of criminals shoot people, just like my driving privileges should not be revoked because some idiots break the law drinking and driving and kill people.
 
Rich2018 said:
What's so wrong with exercising those rights on private property ?

I mean if a tyrant did take over the USA, you'd be free to then leave your property with your guns and stop him.

Win : Win
Click to expand...
Nothing at all you should exercise your right to not allow gun owners on your property If you choose to stay on it to avoid gun owners. Those of us who want to exercise our rights in public can and you'll be safely locked away in your home. Win win
 
Rich2018 said:
Restricting the bearing of arms to private property is not "coming for your guns"

Someone needs a dictionary

What possible objection would gun owners have to that ?
Click to expand...
The objection would be why can't I conceal carry my firearm while out and about to protect myself against criminals that do the same. I dont have a personal security detail surrounding me.
 
Rich2018 said:
How is restricting bearing arms to private property, "breaking" the right to bear arms ?

How is this "authoritarian" ?

Why are they "disgusting" ?

You still get to bear arms...but well away from other people

It's a win : win
I should've thought of it before.
Click to expand...

Its authoritarian because it restricts the right well beyond lawful use. And you aren't exactly keeping and bearing if its only on your own property.

Disgusting because you seek to restrict the rights of others beyond what is constitutional----imagine 1st amendment rights being so restricted, or 4th. You would be having a fit and rightfully so. Its disgusting because you are perfectly okay to destroy the rights of others to satisfy your whims.
 
Maidenrules29 said:
The objection would be why can't I conceal carry my firearm while out and about to protect myself against criminals that do the same. I dont have a personal security detail surrounding me.
Click to expand...

Because:

1. You don't need to
2. You'd be a far greater danger to other people than you'd be a help
 
Rich2018 said:
Because:

1. You don't need to
2. You'd be a far greater danger to other people than you'd be a help
Click to expand...

Then stay in your house on your property that doesn't allow guns and you should be safe.
 
OpportunityCost said:
Its authoritarian because it restricts the right well beyond lawful use.
Click to expand...

How, it just restricts the right to carry to private property


And you aren't exactly keeping and bearing if its only on your own property.
Click to expand...

Yes you would be "bearing" and where else would you "keep" ?


Disgusting because you seek to restrict the rights of others beyond what is constitutional----imagine 1st amendment rights being so restricted, or 4th. You would be having a fit and rightfully so. Its disgusting because you are perfectly okay to destroy the rights of others to satisfy your whims.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't restrict people's rights at all - they would still be able to bear and keep - just only on private property (with the property's owner's permission of course if it isn't yours)

And a court would have to decide if it was "constitutional"

It wouldn't destroy anyone's rights, as they could still keep and bear arms

Restricting the 1st Amendment to private property wouldn't really work would it ?
Besides free speech is not a physical item that you carry around with you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom