Governor floats the idea of confiscating grandfathered AR's and other semi automatic firearms...

[Stomper]

Sorry, but no. That would get any teacher fired, as soon as he got out of jail.
You ride it out till the little bubblegum gives up.

Precisely why I'm not a school bus driver or a school teacher….

I can't handle their stink when they're alive.

Their smell actually improves postmortem….

 

[Xaevian]

Their smell actually improves postmortem

Just pour their dropped Starbucks over them before stacking. Smells like pumpkin spice.

 

[GWS]

Just pour their dropped Starbucks over them before stacking. Smells like pumpkin spice.

Pumpkin spice, patchouli and rank body odor.

 

[gmerkt]

When push comes to shove, most people will throw their guns in the pile and move on with the major part of their life. Their family, job etc. I'm thinking of Australia as an example. I find it hard to believe there would be serious, widespread armed resistance to banning or confiscation. But I could be wrong.

 

[Nosferatu]

When push comes to shove, most people will throw their guns in the pile and move on with the major part of their life. Their family, job etc. I'm thinking of Australia as an example. I find it hard to believe there would be serious, widespread armed resistance to banning or confiscation. But I could be wrong.

Yep. Life is still too good for a large amount of people to go all in and start a shooting war with the Gestapo.

 

[Xaevian]

Yep. Life is still too good for a large amount of people to go all in and start a shooting war with the Gestapo.

Even if life isn't so good, the majority will always throw in with the master. The tiny portion that won't, however, will be very troublesome indeed.

 

[ilikegunspdx]

When push comes to shove, most people will throw their guns in the pile and move on with the major part of their life. Their family, job etc. I'm thinking of Australia as an example. I find it hard to believe there would be serious, widespread armed resistance to banning or confiscation. But I could be wrong.

One critical difference between US and Australia is the constitution (see below). We have the law on our side so the way we can fight and stop this right now is to empower lawsuits. Australians unfortunately did not have the law as an ally. If we can win in the courts there is no need for violent measures. And of course if gun owners vote then hopefully we can stop them from trying to pass unconstitutional laws in the first place.

 

[DunRanull]

I stopped watching when he started peddling watches.

But as to confiscation dickhead gov probably said the quiet part out loud. In WA state they are being more subtle. The ultimate goal for them is no guns in private owners hands. They are incrementally making it harder and harder to have a gun. I think their long term plan is like this:

1) find out where the guns are (ie WA and OR permit process, which is a registry)

2) Create ever more tightening rules that only allow you to legally have a gun if you meet all the requirements. It's like they are forcing you into a smaller and smaller box, and only so many poeple will fit. Fe permit, yearly background check, storage compliance inspections, mental health determination like Hawaii has right now, ammo limits? Who knows what rules they will add over time.

3) if you don't fit into that little box (for example you got your yearly paperwork in late) then they have an excuse for confiscation.

It's a longer and more subtle creep of you rights and if gun owners keep sleepwalking through it when they finally wake up it's gonna be too late. Every single step must be fought imo. And somehow some way we have to get gun owners and people that believe in the constitution, fundamental human rights, and keeping our country free from tyranny to vote.

What's the purpose of voting (many are asking) when the outcomes are pre-determined? After the "OOPSY" 2016 election of President Trump, the PTB are determined to never let anything like that occur again... The old Republic is gasping it's last breaths and the battle lines are being drawn...

 

[RobMa]

 

[nammac]

Have you seen 114? No winners on either coast. It's actually surprising the push back from Oregonians. I forget if it was West Virginia or Virginia where thousands of patriots and good citizens showed up to the state capital. Not sure if that would happen on the west coast .

That was Virginia…. In Oregon, the best you'd get is maybe between 1% and 3% of the gun owners to show up. We're the ones working and running the state economy…

 

[gmerkt]

One critical difference between US and Australia is the constitution

Yes, I was aware of that. Australia was the best example I could find to reflect human natural response. Plus we should add that the Aussie government paid citizens for the guns that were turned in. Pretty good money, too. I looked it up not long ago. Even discounting for inflation and the exchange rate at the time, based on the numbers supplied by news media it looked like a little over $600 per gun. Taking away guns without compensation will tend to make owners even more cranky.

I don't remember a certain US court case, it was a long time ago. Where it was ruled that the "takings clause" of the Fifth Amendment didn't apply to confiscated firearms because that had been done in the interest of public safety. Someone correct me if I've got part of this wrong, but this is what I seem to remember.

Places like California have found sneakier ways to confiscate without compensation. Like freezing grandfathered certain guns in the hands of owners without right of transfer to heirs upon decease.

It will be interesting to see how things go in Canada.

 

[nwslopoke]

I think California calls it, forfeiture of property. If I recall, it got big during the crack era to take homes, cars and other assets.

Now, if you haven't committed any crimes and have a constitutionally protected item like arms, I can't see how they legally can do it. The world is watching.

 

[bcp]

But if they declare your arms illegal, there's the crime.

Bruce

 

[GrayGoose]

Will the governor himself be coming to take them?

 

[Heyjoe]

I think the majority would comply ultimately and the few that stand their ground would be handled with superior force and labeled extremist in a major "win" for the "common sense" gun law pushers.

Thinking law enforcement would quit over this is naive. History tells me otherwise. Some would quit for sure, but most "are just doing their job". It'll happen incrementally. Jordan Peterson has talked about accidental genocide several times. Fascinating and terrifying.

Scary bubblegum inbound I fear.

Not to mention that Americans seem to like their chains of bondage.

 

[Andy54Hawken]

The chains that keep us down in life...
Are often forged by ourselves.
Andy

 

[The Heretic]

Yes, I was aware of that. Australia was the best example I could find to reflect human natural response. Plus we should add that the Aussie government paid citizens for the guns that were turned in. Pretty good money, too. I looked it up not long ago. Even discounting for inflation and the exchange rate at the time, based on the numbers supplied by news media it looked like a little over $600 per gun. Taking away guns without compensation will tend to make owners even more cranky.

I don't remember a certain US court case, it was a long time ago. Where it was ruled that the "takings clause" of the Fifth Amendment didn't apply to confiscated firearms because that had been done in the interest of public safety. Someone correct me if I've got part of this wrong, but this is what I seem to remember.

Places like California have found sneakier ways to confiscate without compensation. Like freezing grandfathered certain guns in the hands of owners without right of transfer to heirs upon decease.

It will be interesting to see how things go in Canada.

The interesting thing, to me at least, is that it is possible Ozland may find itself in a shooting war with China, on their own land. At which point, they will regret not having military firearms in the hands of their citizens.

 

[CamoDeafie]

The interesting thing, to me at least, is that it is possible Ozland may find itself in a shooting war with China, on their own land. At which point, they will regret not having military firearms in the hands of their citizens.

And by then, they (the Aussies) likely will ask the US for "assistance" but because of the economic ties that the US have with China.. I don't know. Maybe we'll give them all the "confiscated" guns from the gun "buybacks"?

 

[ilikegunspdx]

The interesting thing, to me at least, is that it is possible Ozland may find itself in a shooting war with China, on their own land. At which point, they will regret not having military firearms in the hands of their citizens.

Maybe they will be like England in 1939 and beg the us for arms. They may regret destroying 650,000 firearms if they are needed.

 

[CamoDeafie]

Maybe they will be like England in 1939 and beg the us for arms. They may regret destroying 650,000 firearms if they are needed.

Not likely they're more likely to destroy the given guns and say they're "helping the US keep guns off the streets" after it's all said and done