What happens if a type of gun you own becomes illegal?

[OutlawHoss]

Criminals do not comply and are not concerned about enforcement...obviously.

But I have found it interesting that some people have home made F/As and suppressors because they are not concerned about the risk. One friend showed me the holes in his body from the two way range in Vietnam and his response to owning a F/A was, what could the alphabets do to him that hasn't already been done...he said its all about risk and he really doesn't have anything to lose.

I personally have too much at risk to play that game

I think that, in the original scenario of certain firearms becoming illegal, there isn't going to be a homogeneous response from people. Some will be ready to risk more than others, some will want to stay off the radar all together; this is a typical dynamic that exists in any society that has experienced the slow roll of time and tyranny. Some people are more than ready to revolt or not comply, maybe at the cost of effectiveness or negative consequences, others will suss it out and strategize/adapt in real time, and some will just roll over, and every possible response in between these is possible.
Academically speaking, when enough people react in a similar way, which ever way that is, it will have a 'normalizing' affect, i.e. it will set the tone for others, and also the response from the PTB. I think history (past correlative behavior in similar contexts) is the most powerful tool we have to understand how people will behave in the future, but if we truly study history, then one must leave room for the paradox of intelligence, the x factor being what we don't know about what we don't know.
And discussions like this are very integral to how things will play out.

I think being smart about this issue means evaluating, on an individual basis, what risks one is willing to take as one observes the probable consequences of each kind of risk, remembering that not taking a risk, is a risk, with it's own consequences, so it is really better to choose/act proactively than respond after when it's too late.

 

[308]

I think that, in the original scenario of certain firearms becoming illegal, there isn't going to be a homogeneous response from people. Some will be ready to risk more than others, some will want to stay off the radar all together; this is a typical dynamic that exists in any society that has experienced the slow roll of time and tyranny. Some people are more than ready to revolt or not comply, maybe at the cost of effectiveness or negative consequences, others will suss it out and strategize/adapt in real time, and some will just roll over, and every possible response in between these is possible.
Academically speaking, when enough people react in a similar way, which ever way that is, it will have a 'normalizing' affect, i.e. it will set the tone for others, and also the response from the PTB. I think history (past correlative behavior in similar contexts) is the most powerful tool we have to understand how people will behave in the future, but if we truly study history, then one must leave room for the paradox of intelligence, the x factor being what we don't know about what we don't know.
And discussions like this are very integral to how things will play out.

I think being smart about this issue means evaluating, on an individual basis, what risks one is willing to take as one observes the probable consequences of each kind of risk, remembering that not taking a risk, is a risk, with it's own consequences, so it is really better to choose/act proactively than respond after when it's too late.

Well said!

 

[Medic!]

I'm going to add one more consideration here - the more 'common' the AR's, etc. become, the harder it will be to ban them outright. Magazine restrictions, sure. Maybe some gizmo restrictions too, but an outright ban may not be possible except under the most extreme conditions - such as getting the SCOTUS heavily weighted with anti-gun justices (keep that in mind when you vote this November ).

But back to my point, some previous decisions in various court cases have made decisions based on how 'common' a particular gun happens to be. In 1996, when Clinton passed the first AWB, AR's were not that common, today, they are almost ubiquitous - you see them everywhere. And far more people own them. That is a good thing. It makes the attempt to remove a 'common' item so much harder. Not that it couldn't happen, but every new AR purchased is going to make it more and more difficult to take them away.

Just be sure to own some.
You can't decide what to do. If you don't.

1994-2004 Was a wake up call to those that lived through it and had the money and will to buy EBR's but couldn't.

Many have been busy little squirrels since it's sunset.

I don't feel for the guys that ignored this wake up call. And failed to act on it. Those that sat idle.
Given the History on EBR restrictions we have seen and endured. Many have taken the last 12 years for granted.

Many knew Time was against them getting the guns they wanted. But didn't give it any urgency.
It's a small piece of luck that allowed the Brady bill to sunset in the first place! . And temporarily make possible the sale of real EBR's again.

Of course this dose not apply to those just old enough to be getting started.
I'm sorry for your situation.

But Guys. It's only a matter of time. Always has been.

 

[slimmer13]

It's a small piece of luck that allowed the Brady bill to sunset in the first place!

Well nobody told my LGS because my new CMMG MK3 stripped .308 lower is sitting in delay jail (like usual). Might be awhile for a proceed if NICS is out of a job

 

[JO JO]

you all need to read this stuff it is not about the AR it includes all firearms including shotguns and
handguns , rights taken away for any crime even if not found guilty get arrested any crime guilty
or not loose you rights , we are being set up in a bad way folks their is a big picture here , they
really need to be voted out !
http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-...t-weapons-ban/

HB 2354 - 2015-16

http://www.petition2congress.com/929...-confiscation/

http://www.progressivestoday.com/201...dern-firearms/

 

[Andy54Hawken]

Very true , 'cause every gun is a "bad" gun is someone's eyes.
If one class / type /style / make / model etc .. of firearm goes on a ban list , then any can go on a ban list.
Andy

 

[coyote223]

Of course, it would be challenged in the courts, but they will wait for the right time politically to move on it.

They no longer wait for the "right time" any longer. Any state demokkkRats have majority control, they push their gun control BS. That kommiefornia cancer is spreading fast,,,

 

[Nick Burkhardt]

I didn't read the whole tread but in answer to the original question as to what happens

See California

 

[etrain16]

I don't feel for the guys that ignored this wake up call. And failed to act on it. Those that sat idle.
Given the History on EBR restrictions we have seen and endured. Many have taken the last 12 years for granted.

I can speak only for myself, but in 1996, I didn't know much about guns beyond .22's, shotguns and pistols/revolvers. EBR's were something not even on my radar. Honestly, I knew very little about things like AR's, AK's until much later, and much of that came from sites like this one. Back in 1996, no one was talking to me about gun legislation, the fights we would be facing, what could be banned, etc. And I think that is still a huge part of the problem today - way too many gun owners or potential gun owners are simply not well informed about what's going on. Obviously if you're on a site like this, you are up to date and aware, but I wasn't even aware of the existence of this site or sites like it until early 2013, after Sandy Hook sent out another wakeup call.

That's why I think it's important for all gun owners to reach out to other gun owners, make sure they're informed and to also reach out to potential gun owners to inform them of the same. We can't count on the NRA, OFF or even NWFA to get the word out - many people just don't listen and need to have the information practically dropped into their laps.

 

[edslhead]

We'll all be criminals. Oh well

 

[h4344]

I feel like honestly if enough pro gun supporters just walked down to Salem (No not armed) and showed how many people care about their rights then you could not worm your way around it.

Not at all saying anything like "Oh lets show up with guns n bubblegum!!!". More along the lines of "We are serious and have had enough of your bubblegum". Just seems like a better way to get results than blowing up the law makers phones. Its way harder to ignore half the state at your doorstep compared to a full email inbox.

 

[CamoDeafie]

I feel like honestly if enough pro gun supporters just walked down to Salem (No not armed) and showed how many people care about their rights then you could not worm your way around it.

Not at all saying anything like "Oh lets show up with guns n bubblegum!!!". More along the lines of "We are serious and have had enough of your bubblegum". Just seems like a better way to get results than blowing up the law makers phones. Its way harder to ignore half the state at your doorstep compared to a full email inbox.

Problem with that... any anti gunner see that and tweet right to PDX and around Salem to bus in "counter protesters".

 

[h4344]

Problem with that... any anti gunner see that and tweet right to PDX and around Salem to bus in "counter protesters".

How many trucks you think we would need to block bus routes?

 

[CamoDeafie]

How many trucks you think we would need to block bus routes?

Say about a dozen deuce and half trucks.... that'll do nicely?

 

[h4344]

Say about a dozen deuce and half trucks.... that'll do nicely?

"Oh no i ran outta gas in the middle of the road....horizontally. Better use all the uber drivers in the area to take me to a gas station!"

More seriously though i still believe even with counter protesters that it shows gun owners are willing to be more active if their rights are threatened. Let them sign all the online petitions they want. Get more people who will physically show up to "fight" for what they believe in and then you cant be dismissed.

 

[Gene Rojas]

Our founding Fathers knew the power of a firearm- in the hands of law abiding citizens, it was a means of protecting our freedom and way of life from ANYONE practicing tyranny against us. 240 years ago it was the British government, in 2016 it's our own Government. Let's not kid ourselves, boys and girls- our own government has grown so corrupt, powerful, and amoral they could care less about the individual rights of the common man. All we are to them is a a source of revenue, and any laws made are just a means to squeeze more money out of us. When Politicians openly claim to seek to remove our right to bear arms, it's a clear sign they intend to force us into their way of thinking, acting , and behaving. Only armed citizens can tell the government to change laws, remove corrupt officials, and enact sweeping reforms- imagine every armed citizen marching on their state's capital and demanding immediate action. You can smell the fear from every corrupt politician. They know this too- and this is why they want to take away our right to bear arms.

Politicians continue to abuse their given power by creating laws attempting to take guns away from us, but really how will they really enforce these laws that go directly against the US constitution if law enforcement agencies won't enforce them 100%? LEO's know otherwise lawful citizens will defend their right to bear arms with just more than words. They also know we shoot with regular frequency and hone our skills, so if pushed to the limit we will use our weapons- turning a otherwise lawful citizen into a criminal who can proficiently shoot is not something LEO's are willing to risk, given that there are so many criminals with unregistered firearms already. Provoking otherwise law abiding citizens is something Law Enforcement will never do. But if the Government was to hire private agencies to attempt to seize our weapons, most gun owners would definitely not surrender them w/o a fight- I hope they aren't stupid enough to do this, because many gun owners have taken their preparation to a tactical level almost equivalent to law enforcement. These agencies would suffer many casualties.

We will decide at some point when enough is enough, and take the law into our own hands- we gave the politicians the power, and by God we can surely take it away from them. Government is clearly overstepping it's boundaries, and it's time for American citizens to teach these Politicians a lesson in History 101.

Geno

 

[PaulB47]

I think that, in the original scenario of certain firearms becoming illegal, there isn't going to be a homogeneous response from people. Some will be ready to risk more than others, some will want to stay off the radar all together; this is a typical dynamic that exists in any society that has experienced the slow roll of time and tyranny.

I wrote something about this:
"When to resist. When to submit."
When to resist. When to submit., by Paul Bonneau

I think though, that some people tend to exaggerate the danger of resistance. For years I advocated on the big Oregon mailing lists that homeschoolers not bother to register with the state when they homeschool. We certainly never did; I insisted that children are the responsibility of parents, and not the state. The last thing any bureaucrat needs is to interact with an irate and dangerous parent, and I made it clear I would not tolerate anyone messing with my family. And nobody did.

Cops are used to dealing with lowlifes; and lowlifes are used to submitting to cops (what's one more year in jail to such types?). What cops aren't mentally prepared for, is suppressing principled resistance from the more responsible layers of society. They are a bit reticent about this, because they know they themselves depend on this layer for their own support.

Making guns illegal, where so many have strong opinions that arms bearing is not only reasonable but is admirable, is WAY outside the comfort level of most enforcer types. It is also physically dangerous.

I don't understand why so many gun owners persist in having these paranoid fantasies; it's like they cannot be happy unless they are living in fear, or something.

War may well come our way some day, but it will be because the federal government finally ran the economy into the ground, or maybe they pushed Russia too hard. But we will never be disarmed, no matter what. There are too many hard cases among us out here, for that to happen. Cops and other enforcers are not suicidal. They will look out for their own interests, and that does not include dying in a gun confiscation.

 

[HuckleberryFun]

We'll all be criminals. Oh well

We all better start picking out our gangster names. I kinda like "Huck the Nose," but "Bugsy" would be semi-accurate too.

 

[Andy54Hawken]

Gangster names huh?
I'd pick Runs with Scissors LOL
Andy

 

[Bon Sauvage]

If my firearms are declared illegal that will generate a certain response from me.

If they are declared illegal and the government attempts to confiscate them from me that will generate a different response.