Posted on 12/24/2012 8:40:00 PM PST by neverdem
Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., said that she and other gun control advocates are considering a law that would create a program to purchase weapons from gun owners, a proposal that could be compulsory.
“We are also looking at a buy-back program,” Feinstein said today in a press conference. “Now, again, this is a work in progress so these are ideas in the development.”
Gov. Andrew Cuomo, D-N.Y., already discussed the possibility of a buy-back law for his state, but he made clear it would be a forced buyback.
“Confiscation could be an option,” Cuomo told The New York Times yesterday when discussing semiautomatic weapons. “Mandatory sale to the state could be an option. Permitting could be an option — keep your gun but permit it.”
Australia implemented a mandatory buyback program in 1996 following a mass shooting. “The law banned semiautomatic and automatic rifles and shotguns and put in place a mandatory buy-back program for newly banned weapons,” USA Today recalls. “The buyback led to the destruction of 650,000 gun.”
Some liberal activists want the policy imitated here. “That would be like destroying 50 million guns in America today,” the Center for American Progress’ Matt Miller wrote after noting that Australia eliminated 20 percent of the weapons in the country. “The Australian ‘outlaw and repurchase’ option is one approach. But if Congress balks at banning certain weapons entirely, it could make gun owners an offer they can’t refuse. Instead of $200 a gun, Uncle Sam might offer $500.”
Feinstein also said that that former President Bill Clinton had volunteered, on a phone call, to help her get a new gun law passed.
“[Clinton] was talking about the battle back in 1993 with the bill that, interestingly enough, was introduced and passed within the year fo 1993 and went into effect in 1994,” she said. “And, of course, he was president and the White House came alive and was very very helpful in enabling the passage of that bill both in the senate and in the House. So, to have him part of the team again is really quote special for us.”
Too bad they’ve never tried a buyback with crack and heroin.
forced bybacks of an object?
eminent domain is for land for a “purpose”.
car recalls do not happen even though safety laws and emission laws change.
legally, absent a communist style judge, there is no workable justification for something that is a household item.
The NRA tried to re-write history and state Myth was pro-gun; this is the truth -
Mitt Romney. When he ran for the Senate and for governor, he supported a ban on assault rifles and the Brady Bill's five-day waiting period for gun purchases. He proudly said those positions wouldn't make him "the hero of the NRA." As governor, he made Massachusetts the first state to permanently ban assault weapons. He has even flip-flopped about whether he owns any guns. In New Hampshire, he was asked his view on the Second Amendment. He responded that he had been a hunter "pretty much all my life." Later, red-faced aides of Romney had to admit that Romney had never had a hunting license, and under further questioning, Romney acknowledged that his "lifetime of hunting" was having shot at some birds during a Republican governors meeting during a fund-raising event and maybe shooting at "small varmints" when he was seventeen with his cousin.
An example of the NRA's boy talking out both sides of his mouth -
I do support the Second Amendment. I would have signed the assault weapon ban that came to his desk. I said I would have supported that and signed a similar bill in our state. It was a bill worked out, by the way, between pro-gun lobby and anti-gun lobby individuals. Both sides of the issue came together and found a way to provide relaxation in licensing requirements and allow more people to--to have guns for their own legal purposes. So we signed that in Massachusetts, and I’d support that at the federal level. It did not pass at the federal level. I do not believe we need new legislation. I do not support any new legislation of an assault weapon ban nature, including that against semiautomatic weapons. We have laws in place that, if they’re implemented & enforced, will provide the protection and the safety of the American people. I do support the right of individuals to bear arms, whether for hunting purposes or for protection purposes or any other reasons. That’s the right that people have
They also waited until the last minute to get on board with DC v Heller and then their incompetence nearly sank the case.......from Wiki Dick Heller – a licensed special police officer for the District of Columbia. For his job, Heller carried a gun in federal office buildings, but was not allowed to have one in his home.[16] Heller had lived in southeast D.C. near the Kentucky Courts public housing complex since 1970 and had seen the neighborhood "transformed from a child-friendly welfare complex to a drug haven". Heller had also approached the National Rifle Association about a lawsuit to overturn the D.C. gun ban, but the NRA declined.
The NRA......if you can't fix the problem, there's money to be had by pro-longing it.
Would anyone cooperate with the buyback?
The other choice was Obama. How is he, liberal Feinstein and Pelosi working out for you?
Well, here we are again. Give up your weapons, ya might as well hand over your freedom.
Uncle Shew-gah’s tryin to antagonize folks. I’mma fraid their spoilin for a fight.
Americans are not gonna just hand over their weapons, they are as high as a street pimp if they think were gonna just lay down our arms at their feet.
Would you rather have six, or a half dozen? And of course Fineswine and Piglousy would still be in place.
While those are nice strawmen that you stood up. It does nothing for the fact that the NRA is a sham as evidenced by their support for Myth.
By the way, how is Harry Reid for you? The NRA has backed him in the past and kindly stayed out of his race this last time around.
Speaking of strawman! LOL Anyone who believes Romney would be the same as Obama is either delusional or bone stupid.
And of course Fineswine and Piglousy would still be in place.
That's not the NRA or Romney's fault, is it?
the NRA is a sham
If ever you had any credibility, that dumbass statement erased it.
Dick Heller Addresses NRA Convention
By the way, how is Harry Reid for you?
All the state of Nevada has to do is introduce a viable pro 2nd Amendment candidate. Apparently the majority of people there are content with Harry.
I have a hard time believing that the state of Georgia (mine), Alabama, Texas, Louisiana, ... are going to willfully assist the Feds in going door-to-door to collect guns from anyone. An outright confiscation has no chance of passing and even less chance of succeeding. It may take 2 or 3 individuals fighting back to kick off the resistance, but I have little doubt it will occur. Given the weak state of our economy and the mess in Europe that could be the catalyst to bring down the whole house of cards.
I can not imagine the House ever passing such a ban let alone confiscation. Even Congress is not that dumb!!
$500 possibly for my personal possessions???
I believe my collection is priceless, to the point of it being to protect and defend my liberties and freedoms...You cannot put a price on that...
This nonsense is the last straw for me...These elected officials are without any doubt enemies of those virtures and this country...
I suggest to those here to make a decision now to where you fall on the potential this agenda poses to yourselves...
They are hedging their bets on that we will not fight anymore, and that your nieghbors, friends, co-workers and even family will turn on YOU and turn you in for non-compliance...
So basically a gun registration would be un-necessary, unless it is designed to illicite a response from the community of friends, nieghbors, co-workers and family to compell YOU to comply and just go along to get along...
So now we will have to rely upon the elected officials we have been able to put into place to keep the lid on this potential explosion???
The government, if it all goes their way will be able to be very surgical about how they bust the chops of those of us in thier sights...They will turn the screws at the right time and we will not see it coming...
Unless you have your “plan” ready to go now...
I personally would stop talking about this stuff, not that it really matters now, but some of us should be ok, for the most part...Some of us will have a rough go of it...
As it stands now I do not trust anyone in D.C. to fight enough for us...
So it is up to US...And, a part of me likes our odds...
Yeah, I can’t see a confiscation bill passing now or anytime in the near future. But beyond that time range I can absolutely see it. The growing demographics in this country - Hispanics, Asians, single women - do not support the Second Amendment. They are much more supportive of gun control and gun bans.
We may not win the Presidency again, and the Senate seems a lost cause now too considering how deeply we got our clocks cleaned this year with conservative, moderate, and liberal Republicans all losing, in many cases to shitty opponents.
As far as the Sup Court goes, well now we can point to the Heller and McDonald decisions, but they’ll be overturned. And even if they’re not, I doubt even this Sup Court would strike down an ‘assault weapons’ ban, or do anything about restrictions on magazine capacity or attempts to restrict ammunition.
Since House members are the easiest to pressure, we may maintain a pro-Second Amendment House for a while, but I’m convinced they will go along with most of what Feinstein and Obama wants next year. The GOP establishment is desperate to moderate the party’s image. What better way to do that than banning evil assault weapons? My pessimism is bolstered even more by the knowledge that much of the GOP establishment hates its base. They are embarrassed that they must rely on white people, and conservative Christians, and gun owners to win elections.
Oh my. I guess I have a different perspective. I thought we lost the Senate this year because we nominated two idiots, at least with respects to their political capabilities: Akin and Mourdock both lost because they were stupid enough to make statements concerning rape. Both should have known better. The fact that they did not shows how weak they were as candidates (sorry to the purest out there but you can have principles while avoiding idiotic statements).
Romney was the perfect foil for Obama, and many on this site tried to highlight that fact. His staff made matters worse by allowing Obama to define him unanswered throughout the summer. Demographics had little to do with it.
It is important to remember that following W's victory in 2004 the Republicans were supposed to never lose again. We all remember 2006. These things tend to swing back and forth, and it is likely we will see gains in the Senate in 2014 followed by the presidency in 2016. Nothing guaranteed, but there is a deep bench of diverse Conservatives to choose from ... the advantage of holding 30 governorships.
follow the politician think.
since they are illegal they will be priced as scrap metal.
as scrap metal you will be given $5 AND TAXED for the income.
you forgot tax you on the income...
That is the money they take under threat of force.
We did nominate two idiots in Akin and Mourdock. Generally speaking it’s troubling that Republicans can be so unprepared for obvioius gotcha questions from a hostile media. Between the two, Mourdock is the bigger idiot since he made his idiotic remarks after Akin made his. It was really stunning to hear that moron say what he did.
But even if we had won those two races, we still would have come up at least 3 seats short in the Senate. We had the popular, moderate, former governor Tommy Thompson lose to a far-left open lesbian in Wisconsin. We had two seemingly good, establishment yet mostly conservative candidates in Montana and ND lose. We had another idiot in Virginia (G Allen) lose to the awful Tim Kaine. We had an establishment dolt with a great name (Connie Mack Jr) lose to another unpopular incumbent in Florida. We had a liberal Republican tailor made for Mass in Scott Brown lose to the ridiculous Elizabeth Warren.
We had conservatives, moderates, and liberals losing. We lost with good and bad candidates. We lost to unpopular, vulnerable incumbent Democrats. There was no pattern except that people didn’t want to vote for the candidate with an ‘R’ beside their name.
And I disagree about 2004. Yes there was some doom and gloom from some Democrats (I remember C Schumer and C Matthews actually suggesting the Dems may have to make peace on gay marriage). And there was some misplaced triumphalism from Republicans. We did do well in Senate races, winning all the competitive ones except Colorado I believe. But Bush only beat Kerry by a few points. I was actually discouraged by that, but then again I am a pessimist.
Romney probably did make a mistake by letting Obama have the summer to define him. And I actually did mispeak to say the loss was totally demographic. It is a media-driven exaggeraton to say Hispanics, Asians, and single women won the day for Obama. I mean, had Romney done a little better with white voters in a few key states then he’d be President-elect Romney right now.
But going forward the white share of the electorate will continue to shrink, and that is bad news for the GOP. We are not going to win Hispanics (even if we nominate Rubio, who is afterall, a white Cuban) or Asians. Single women will continue to support the party that wants government to be a surrogate husband for them. These groups are lost to us, and they are growing.
I would like to be hopeful about 2014, but after the lost opportunities of 2010 (Sharon Angle) and the ass whooping of 2012, I just can’t. And I can see us winning the Presidency back in 2016, but I can’t see us with much chance after that. In a few more cycles Texas will become a battleground state, and then it’s pretty much lights out.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.