Replies

Sorry for the delay in answering. My belief, based on asking the question to federal and local LEO's is that initially, they would be inclined to follow the direction of "lawful" authority. this would not be true in all cases, but in many. Some would balk at the order, some would vigorously comply.

There will be casualties on both sides if this should come to pass. I think ultimately, the citizens would win. Law enforcement is accustomed to outright resistance by "citizens" (as opposed to dirtbags) who vehemently resist. If and when the casualties start to take place, there will be a rethinking process.

I'm particularly worried about young cops, who see it as their role in society to be "avenging angels"; "the law" and the ones who will decide who is right and wrong. It takes an average of about eight years of real, full-time experience to make a good cop. Some make it quicker, some never make it. Just like the rest of us, LEO's have to mature. If you look around you and try to evaluate the personalities of family members, neighbors, local officials, etc. you will note that there are varying levels of competence, maturity (or call it seasoning) and general understanding of the rules of life. In this country, we give 21 year- olds a small amount of training, a badge and gun and send them out to enforce our laws. There is occasionally a requirement that the officer have college education, and that is important, but far too rare.

As I said, some of these guys and gals will side with the constructionist interpretation of the 2nd Amendment and some will follow their "leaders". All law enforcement/national security/military, etc. are dependent on government for a paycheck. That puts them in a dilemma. Do they lat out refuse to follow order and subject themselves (and their families) to termination and loss of all their material goods? Or do they follow their conscience and refuse unlawful orders? I hope that as things progress, law enforcement leaders will start to think beyond their first inclination to follow the orders of "the government" and start a sort of "guerrilla" operation in which they become extremely inept at finding the newly banned weapons.

I fear that we're about to find out.

Law enforcement is accustomed to outright resistance by "citizens" (as opposed to dirtbags) who vehemently resist.

Should read:Law enforcement is not accustomed to outright resistance by "citizens" (as opposed to dirtbags) who vehemently resist.

Do they lat out refuse to follow order and subject themselves (and their families) to termination and loss of all their material goods?

Should read: Do they flat out refuse to follow order and subject themselves (and their families) to termination and loss of all their material goods?

Thanks for the answer...a good one.

I think it will also depend on the areas of the country. It probably won't go over well in the mid west, north and south but in the northeast and west coast there are already problems over Second Amendment rights. We've all read in the news about the challenge to keep arms in Washington, DC over the prohibitions by the city. NYC could be the next challenge with the Plaxico Buress case. (Not defending Buress, he was just dumb, dumb enough to shoot himself and ought to have his weapon confiscated and permit revoked.)

A couple years ago, my brother in upstate NY was detained and searched in a supermarket parking lot by a town cop. He owns rifles, shotguns and handguns (most of which are family heirlooms) and has a carry permit but he wasn't packing and didn't have a weapon in his car. The town he lives in (and where I grew up) was once farms and railroads and IBM, hunting and trapping were fall and winter activities, woodchuck hunting for farmers paid well when I was a kid.

Now there's been a huge influx of commuters from the City and there's been a little war going with the local yokels. One from the bedroom community phoned the local constabulary without cause about my brother while he was at the market. Nothing happened since nothing was found and nothing amiss but that's the sort of liberal harassment that's creating animosity in the area.

This isn't the only instance of a growing liberal population who votes in town supervisors and councils changing the rules in rural community. A good friend of my brother (and mine) got his licenses revoked for his hot dog stand, which was very popular and forced to move into another township. I talked to him about it and he said it was BS but no big deal. He moved it about three miles away into another township and pays his taxes there. He is a retired NYC homicide detective.