Skip to comments.Boston Globe: Gun Confiscation is Neededů and Impossible
Posted on 11/28/2017 7:42:34 AM PST by marktwain
The Boston Globe recent ran an article where it acknowledged the obvious: the long term goal of the gun control movement (recently relabeled as gun safety), is to confiscate a large number of Americans' firearms.
The Globe has almost everything else wrong in its article, but they are honest about the desire for gun confiscation.
From the bostonglobe.com:
In other words, the proposals arent just difficult to enact in the current political climate; their practical effects would also be quite limited. On occasion, though, leading Democrats will make oblique reference to a more sweeping policy change: seizing a huge number of weapons from law-abiding citizens.
At a New Hampshire forum in the fall of 2015, Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton spoke approvingly of an Australian gun buyback program that collected more than 650,000 weapons a buyback that, she neglected to mention, was compulsory.
The logic of gun control lies, at bottom, in substantially reducing the number of deadly weapons on the street and confiscation is far and away the most effective approach. Is there any conceivable turn of events in our politics that could make confiscation happen? And what would a mass seizure look like?
Then the article goes on to praise the imposition of extreme restrictions on gun ownership in Australia, and to put forward claims that the restrictions worked. Those claims are easily countered. That is not what we are dealing with here.
Ultimately, the Globe admits that massive gun confiscation is not possible, at least now, at least not directly.
Why are so many people on the political left willing to consider confiscating guns, in direct violation of the Constitution, with the obvious high costs, high risks, and low chance of success? Here are some
(Excerpt) Read more at ammoland.com ...
I see a lot of dead politicians.
Does Chuck Schumer have the guts to show up at your front door and demand that you surrender your guns to him? How 'bout Diane Feinstein? Hillary Clinton? Any of that lot?
Of course they don't. They're cowards.
Must be in your dreams. In my dreams, I see politicians giving most Americans the middle finger. I would wager my dreams are far closer to reality, if not on the mark.
Notice how liberals rename their communist ideas when they aren’t popular? Gun control now “gun safety”. Global Warming now “climate change”. Socialized medicine now “single payer”.
Liberals never change their GOALS, they just try to find a name you’ll like.
They would run out of “confiscators” before the end of the first day.
If you think the 3 percenters will passively wait for confiscators to come to their door, once hostilities start, you are not looking at a reasonable reality.
Politicians like Chuck Schumer will need massive security details and have to live like Saddam Hussein, because they will never know who might be one of three million assassins wanting to take him out.
Most of those people know more about killing than Schumer ever considered.
If the left ever passes gun confiscation it’ll be a good day to call in sick at the Boston Globe.
Aren’t non criminals like a million more times more likely to die in an auto wreck or a slip in a shower than being shot?
It is called civil war - that is what it would look like. Remember the British tried that back in the 1700's.
“In the Pregressive Universe, the actual risks associated with government attempting to steal guns from We the People will fall on hirelings in blue uniforms, not on the cowardly politicians.”
Anyone in a blue or black uniform who carries out such an order in defiance of their oath deserves whatever happens to them.
The gun ban hasnt worked so well in Australia as gun crime still exists and well armed terrorists have been apprehended. Only the law abiding Aussie has been disarmed
However...as soon as you got out of those areas, enforcement and compliance would plummet precipitously. In rural red states the populace would thumb their nose at confiscation and actively work to sabotage the process, and most rural law enforcement would simply refuse to even try.
The 2nd amendment is such a pesky thing. LOL!
I do not think that for an instant.
But that's not the point. The point is that Chucky hasn't the guts to actually DO what he wants to LEGISLATE.
Cultural Marxism always repackages what crap hasn’t been sold by it yet. They never give up. They only accept a “yes” vote and never give anyone a second vote once they’ve got it.
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.