a different take - Why Gun Confiscation May be Good for You

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • 4sarge

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    21   0   0
    Mar 19, 2008
    5,897
    99
    FREEDONIA
    Why Gun Confiscation May be Good for You

    By Kirby Ferris

    Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership. © JPFO 2009

    Let’s take a look at the silver lining in the cloud that is gun confiscation. Try to remember: nothing is all bad.

    Economics are a big consideration. Black market guns will likely be cheaper than they were at the gun shop or sporting goods store. And no more serial numbers on guns or any of that silly paperwork to fill out.

    There will be a market driven “trickle down” effect on the end user’s price. To your benefit.

    Doncha see? There are at least 65 million gun owners in America today. That’s probably as large a percent of the nation as ignored alcohol Prohibition. 65 million potential customers for black market guns is an awfully attractive business opportunity. And used-to-be gun owners will be seriously motivated buyers. Having someone disarm you is a little more edgy than being told you can’t have a beer. Well … that may be stretching it. But you get my point.
    Since the Federal Government won’t be able to license or tax illicit guns (just like they don’t tax crack cocaine, or pot, or trailer park meth) guns will be cheaper right off the bat! Presently, gun makers have to pay a ten percent excise tax on every gun they manufacture. Not on every gun they sell … on every one they make. That cost gets passed on to you. Not so with a black market.

    Remember that in 2000 a London newspaper (Jan. 16th Sunday Times of London, JPFO alert) reported that black market Berretta submachine guns (not simply semi autos) were available on the cheery British streets for a paltry $320 U.S. dollars! That same firearm, legally purchased with a Class III permit, would have cost you thousands of dollars. And that’s if you could even obtain the gun under prior law (no post 1986 machine guns). That should make a Libertarian out of anyone!

    Also remember that your state and county won’t be taxing the illicit gun you buy. So what you’ve got is a product that has been unburdened of even more hidden and unhidden costs. So take at least $50 off that stuffy old pre-ban gun store counter price!

    The lower day-to-day overhead of the black market gun seller also means cheaper guns to you. Have you ever owned or operated a retail store? Just opening the doors can cost a legitimate store owner hundreds of dollars a day. What with rent, insurance, utilities, a staff of sales people (and unemployment insurance for them), property taxes on inventory and fixtures, and small details like Federal Income Tax? Hey, it’s tough to make an honest living. Every single firearm in his store has to pay its way to keep his doors open.

    Working out of an old Econoline van in a back alley is much, much cheaper. So you, the eager buyer, won’t have a whole added set of costs passed along to you. Let’s take at least an additional $50 off that pre-ban store counter price! (Yeah, I know you can’t put it on your credit card. There will be a few draw backs.)

    But now look at this! Since all guns have been confiscated, and are illegal to own, crime has plummeted in American cities! Rodney King’s plea has come true. We CAN all just get along! So look at the silver lining in this cloud, Mister or Madam Taxpayer. You won’t have to pay for so many police officers. The guns have now been “taken out of the hands of criminals”. Why wasn’t this done earlier? If just one life had been saved it would have been worth it.

    What? You say that you really don’t think it will be like that? You think there will actually have to be MORE police on the streets? Oh … to … to apprehend the illegal gun dealers? Instead of the gang bangers who don’t kill anybody any more? Okay, okay. I got it. Because guns have been “taken out of the hands of criminals”. But could maybe, possibly get back “into the hands of criminals”. Unless there are more cops.

    So more cops is still a good thing. So maybe a career in Law Enforcement would be a good idea if you are a young person coming out of high school. So, you mothers and fathers out there, gun confiscation is good because it opens up another potential career for Jenny or Johnny. Especially at the Federal level. Yes, as BATFE agents! And frankly, Johnny isn’t doing so well in that computer class is he? And Jenny isn’t the sharpest knife in the drawer, is she? (Well, at least her teeth are straight.)

    Another career that will certainly benefit from gun confiscation is being a politician! Times are getting a bit testy, aren’t they? The common folk are getting angry with politicians. All this silly “Tea Party” talk. If I was a politician I’d sure feel safer knowing that guns won’t get “into the hands of citizens”... uh, I mean criminals.
    I have to watch myself. Citizens aren’t criminals unless they have guns. And criminals, we must remind ourselves (unless they are illegal aliens), are still citizens and deserve the protection of The Constitution. Right? No? Illegal aliens also deserve the protection of the Constitution? Well … okay. I guess. Aw, heck. Can’t you see I’m with you in spirit here? I’m getting all warm and fuzzy. This is becoming as clear as Obamanomics!

    And now look at the potential for extra sources of income for cops, BATFE Agents (doncha love ‘em?), FBI snipers, and all those underpaid politicians. Bribes, my fellow Americans! Bribes! Since the black market in banned firearms will be so lucrative, every cop on the block, every BATFE Agent in his Darth Vader duds, every pencil necked geek politician will have lots of expendable cash to pump back into the economy.

    Bribes will be good for America! No longer will BATFE agents have to rely on phony testing to entrap people to move up the ladder (watch the "Gang Movie" Trailer - purchase the DVD). Instead they can become very wealthy by simply looking the other way.

    For the new financial elite, the “Bang Bang Billionaires” to make big bucks, they must, at the same time, grease the palms of the GovCrims and the appointed lackeys we’ve empowered with our confiscated taxes. Double dipping politicians will love gun prohibition.

    This won’t be like booze Prohibition. BATFE agents aren’t the pure of heart “Untouchables” of Elliot Ness days. These goons (who brought you government sponsored murder at Ruby Ridge and Waco) are already corrupt beyond redemption. Any black marketeer worth his salt should be able to come to a very comfortable “understanding” with his local BATFE agent.

    Hey, I forgot about the car dealers! Just like all those Cadillac Escalades sold to ghetto drug dealers, black market gun sellers will soon be looking to upgrade from that ratty old Econoline van. Gun confiscation will save the American auto industry!

    And how about the Third World? Oops, I mean “developing nations”. Everyone, everywhere can make a half decent AK-47. Give the Chinese a break, willya! Sales of bootleg DVDs are dropping off. Third World nations need another source of revenue. Chinese AKs, Pakistani AKs, Cuban AKs (with a free box of cigars?), and even Somali AKs can be a terrific source of income for those beleaguered folks. Or how about an RPG to keep in your closet? Hey, in for a dime, in for a dollar, right?

    Now don’t get me wrong. Those Third World folks can make ‘em, but they can’t own ‘em. That would be wrong. The United Nations wants everyone who is not a soldier or a cop disarmed. So one of the ways we can keep the poor of the world disarmed … and not quite so poor … is to have every gun they make be bought by black marketeers here in America. And then bought by Americans desperate to ease that strange discomfort of being defenseless.

    Man, why the common folks just can't trust their governments is a mystery to me. Aren't Gunless People happy people? Well, I guess we could quibble about that. (watch the "Innocents Betrayed " Trailer - purchase the DVD)

    Hey! Here’s a great idea! The government buys (at pre-ban market value) all the illegal guns off the Americans who buy them on the black market. And then gives the purchasers of the illicit weapons amnesty from being punished for breaking the law. (If they can do it for illegal aliens, they can do it for illicit gun purchasers, can’t they?)

    That will sure keep the wheels of commerce going, won’t it? It will also help us “all get along”. And maybe we’ll have a huge wave of prosperity, like that which brought us the “dot.commers”. I’m telling you, it will work! Ban, buy back, ban, buy back. Like paying farmers to not plant crops, right?

    So don’t fear firearms confiscation. Embrace it. Let’s embrace “change” just like our illustrious Irish-American President asks us to. (Hey, does anyone know where I can get some .38 ammo? Fast Eddy is back ordered, and Micky The Fish is sold out and doesn’t know when the next freighter is coming in.)


    See all of Kirby Ferris' articles.

    Why Gun Confiscation May be Good for You
     

    sloughfoot

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    26   0   0
    Apr 17, 2008
    7,157
    83
    Huntertown, IN
    Have you seen the videos of those guys in Pakistan making semi-auto 9mm pistols and full auto AK47's in their huts with hammers, chisels, and files.

    I think that is the concept.

    Plenty of folks everywhere that can do that. I can't because I am not limber enough to sit on a hard floor all day long making firearms.:):

    Good post. Thought provoking.

    A man that truly values his freedom cannot be suppressed.:patriot:
     

    dburkhead

    Master
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Mar 18, 2008
    3,930
    36
    Have you seen the videos of those guys in Pakistan making semi-auto 9mm pistols and full auto AK47's in their huts with hammers, chisels, and files.

    I think that is the concept.

    Plenty of folks everywhere that can do that. I can't because I am not limber enough to sit on a hard floor all day long making firearms.:):

    So use those "hammers, chisels, and files" to make a chair first. ;)

    Michael Z. Williamson's "I am a Killer*" essay seems appropriate here.

    *"Killer" in this instance does not equal "murderer." Interesting essay.
     

    Chefcook

    Shooter
    Rating - 100%
    8   0   0
    Oct 20, 2008
    4,163
    36
    Raccoon City
    The Munchkin Wrangler
    Human beings only have two ways to deal with one another: reason and force. If you want me to do something for you, you have a choice of either convincing me via argument, or force me to do your bidding under threat of force. Every human interaction falls into one of those two categories, without exception. Reason or force, that's it.

    In a truly moral and civilized society, people exclusively interact through persuasion. Force has no place as a valid method of social interaction, and the only thing that removes force from the menu is the personal firearm, as paradoxical as it may sound to some.

    When I carry a gun, you cannot deal with me by force. You have to use reason and try to persuade me, because I have a way to negate your threat or employment of force. The gun is the only personal weapon that puts a 100-pound woman on equal footing with a 220-pound mugger, a 75-year old retiree on equal footing with a 19-year old gangbanger, and a single gay guy on equal footing with a carload of drunk guys with baseball bats. The gun removes the disparity in physical strength, size, or numbers between a potential attacker and a defender.

    There are plenty of people who consider the gun as the source of bad force equations. These are the people who think that we'd be more civilized if all guns were removed from society, because a firearm makes it easier for a mugger to do his job. That, of course, is only true if the mugger's potential victims are mostly disarmed either by choice or by legislative fiat--it has no validity when most of a mugger's potential marks are armed. People who argue for the banning of arms ask for automatic rule by the young, the strong, and the many, and that's the exact opposite of a civilized society. A mugger, even an armed one, can only make a successful living in a society where the state has granted him a force monopoly.

    Then there's the argument that the gun makes confrontations lethal that otherwise would only result in injury. This argument is fallacious in several ways. Without guns involved, confrontations are won by the physically superior party inflicting overwhelming injury on the loser. People who think that fists, bats, sticks, or stones don't constitute lethal force watch too much TV, where people take beatings and come out of it with a bloody lip at worst. The fact that the gun makes lethal force easier works solely in favor of the weaker defender, not the stronger attacker. If both are armed, the field is level. The gun is the only weapon that's as lethal in the hands of an octogenarian as it is in the hands of a weightlifter. It simply wouldn't work as well as a force equalizer if it wasn't both lethal and easily employable.

    When I carry a gun, I don't do so because I am looking for a fight, but because I'm looking to be left alone. The gun at my side means that I cannot be forced, only persuaded. I don't carry it because I'm afraid, but because it enables me to be unafraid. It doesn't limit the actions of those who would interact with me through reason, only the actions of those who would do so by force. It removes force from the equation...and that's why carrying a gun is a civilized act..
     

    ihateiraq

    Shooter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Feb 25, 2009
    2,813
    36
    Upinya
    buying guns out of econoline vans is truly the only way to go. i especially like them when they have tick marks on the barrel and the sn is etched out. it adds character.
     
    Rating - 100%
    130   0   0
    Jan 28, 2009
    3,697
    113
    The Munchkin Wrangler
    Human beings only have two ways to deal with one another: reason and force. If you want me to do something for you, you have a choice of either convincing me via argument, or force me to do your bidding under threat of force. Every human interaction falls into one of those two categories, without exception. Reason or force, that's it.

    In a truly moral and civilized society, people exclusively interact through persuasion. Force has no place as a valid method of social interaction, and the only thing that removes force from the menu is the personal firearm, as paradoxical as it may sound to some.

    When I carry a gun, you cannot deal with me by force. You have to use reason and try to persuade me, because I have a way to negate your threat or employment of force. The gun is the only personal weapon that puts a 100-pound woman on equal footing with a 220-pound mugger, a 75-year old retiree on equal footing with a 19-year old gangbanger, and a single gay guy on equal footing with a carload of drunk guys with baseball bats. The gun removes the disparity in physical strength, size, or numbers between a potential attacker and a defender.

    There are plenty of people who consider the gun as the source of bad force equations. These are the people who think that we'd be more civilized if all guns were removed from society, because a firearm makes it easier for a mugger to do his job. That, of course, is only true if the mugger's potential victims are mostly disarmed either by choice or by legislative fiat--it has no validity when most of a mugger's potential marks are armed. People who argue for the banning of arms ask for automatic rule by the young, the strong, and the many, and that's the exact opposite of a civilized society. A mugger, even an armed one, can only make a successful living in a society where the state has granted him a force monopoly.

    Then there's the argument that the gun makes confrontations lethal that otherwise would only result in injury. This argument is fallacious in several ways. Without guns involved, confrontations are won by the physically superior party inflicting overwhelming injury on the loser. People who think that fists, bats, sticks, or stones don't constitute lethal force watch too much TV, where people take beatings and come out of it with a bloody lip at worst. The fact that the gun makes lethal force easier works solely in favor of the weaker defender, not the stronger attacker. If both are armed, the field is level. The gun is the only weapon that's as lethal in the hands of an octogenarian as it is in the hands of a weightlifter. It simply wouldn't work as well as a force equalizer if it wasn't both lethal and easily employable.

    When I carry a gun, I don't do so because I am looking for a fight, but because I'm looking to be left alone. The gun at my side means that I cannot be forced, only persuaded. I don't carry it because I'm afraid, but because it enables me to be unafraid. It doesn't limit the actions of those who would interact with me through reason, only the actions of those who would do so by force. It removes force from the equation...and that's why carrying a gun is a civilized act..
    You sir are a true American,I couldn't have said it any better.This is the common sense that most people in this country don't have any more.:patriot:
     
    Top Bottom