Government taking away gun owner rights

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!
  • WeAreNotAlone

    Plinker
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Mar 14, 2010
    65
    6
    Plan to disarm the citizens of the United States of America

    USA TIMELINE,

    1860?
    (This is from memory guys from a article written by Neal Know about 1984)

    When the metallic cartridge guns first came out, Anti-Gunners rallied to try to get those guns restricted to LE and Military ONLY.

    Newpaper reports of the time:

    Splits hot lead like Mount Vesuvius.
    Has more firepower than a whole regiment of soldiers.
    A man armed with one of these weapons cannot be taken.
    These arms have NO SPORTING USE.


    Luckily persons back THEN knew the intent of the 2nd Amendment was that civilians be armed at the SAME LEVEL as the government troops.

    If the Anti-Gunners had been successful= No metallic cartridges for civilians... No Colt Single Action, Henry, Winchester 94, etc...



    1934 NFA is passed = A $200 tax for each NFA item is levied (About $3,400+ in today's money) Congress could not BAN them, so they TAXED them.


    1968

    1986- This is the BIG ONE, and the lays the groundwork for the END of the 2nd Amendment. (Really)
    Firearm Owners Protection Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    In 1986 the Hughes amendment (a poison pill) was added to the
    Firearm Owners' Protection Act (FOPA). What it did was to BAN new production (transferable) Class III items.
    For the first time the production of a whole class of weapons were (and are) BANNED. Banned in that no new Class III NFA Firearms can be made that can be owned by civilians. On the flip side of this is LE and the Military are free to order as MANY as they want.

    What is very disturbing is for civilians TECHNOLOGY is FROZEN at 1986 levels. (Think about the 18xx metallic cartridge attempted ban)1986 also banned allot of spare parts IIRC, over the years more and more restrictions have been put into place to restrict spares.

    Why is the 1986 Hughes ban important:
    Since 1934 there has been (1) documented case of a NFA registered weapon being used in a crime out of several hundred thousand+ items in the NFA registry. Crime was committed by a off-duty Police Officer.

    1- in Several hundred thousand
    + items.. Those are pretty good odds!

    *Other references put it @ZERO occurances from 9134- to the 1986 BAN.

    Fact= If they can ban a item that statistically isn't a problem they can ban anything.


    Fact= Anyone here seen Star-Trek, Star-Gate, Buck Rogers type weapons on the sci-fi channels /movies?

    A hundred years ago today's weapons were Buck-Rogers" materal, 10-20-40 years from now LE and Military will have those types of weapons and more than likely IF you are allowed to own a firearm at that point you will NOT be allowed to own anything that is of the same lethality.

    That's a big problem.

    One side (government) will be armed to the teeth with weapons that can shoot thru 10 feet of concrete, that have infrared imagining, Sound tracking, motion tracking built in, etc .. the other side with 22 Short caliber if they are armed at all...



    *1986 Hughes Class II BAN
    Note that LE and the Military can still get whatever items they want, no $200 tax per item. CHEAP.
    Whatever was in the registry in 1986 is "Transferable), rare and it priced accordingly.
    Over time due to attrition the pool of transferable items will drop each year making them too valuable to shoot.

    .
     
    Last edited:

    flagtag

    Master
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Apr 27, 2008
    3,330
    38
    Westville, IL
    At least one positive in the "gun grab" issue - we now know about what happened in NO. How often did something like that happen before (and was reported on)? I think the people of NO were taken by surprise. They didn't expect to have their protection taken away from them.

    But, we know that it is possible in such an event because it WAS reported on and we can prepare for it. If an "event" happens, our guns could be secured (if necessary) until after the event. "Nope! No guns here!" :rolleyes:
     

    WeAreNotAlone

    Plinker
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Mar 14, 2010
    65
    6
    The more we can show a "pattern" the more successful we will be in stopping gun grabs

    At least one positive in the "gun grab" issue - we now know about what happened in NO. How often did something like that happen before (and was reported on)? I think the people of NO were taken by surprise. They didn't expect to have their protection taken away from them.

    But, we know that it is possible in such an event because it WAS reported on and we can prepare for it. If an "event" happens, our guns could be secured (if necessary) until after the event. "Nope! No guns here!" :rolleyes:

    RE: What happened in NO. ???

    NO= ???? Please when reporting such serious events to post as much detail as you can so others in other parts of the USA? can be alerted!

    The more we can show a "pattern" the more successful we will be in stopping gun grabs.

    .
     

    Thumper

    Expert
    Rating - 100%
    5   0   0
    Jan 22, 2009
    1,133
    38
    South Indy
    well if i was one of the residents there, i would have fought back. you dont have to always kill to fight back. hiding from them when they come to take them would be a form of fighting back too, but if it ever happened nation wide then yes it would have to come to violence! and some of you might call me a criminal for saying that, but im not. its been proven that the basis for the law that was innacted to do that in louisiana was unconstitutional. so if you kill an agent of the government while they are violating the constitution does it make it wrong? Is it wrong to kill a robber who is pointing a gun at you? he is breaking the constitution too so whats the difference i ask you? just food for thought, im not insinuating a revolt, but im pretty confident that the majority of Americans will stand up too if the time comes. a lot of people know whats right and are willing to do things, but they need leaders to show them the way, just like in the revolutionary war, they had to be organized by strong leaders or else it would have all fallen apart. the govt agents that hate the constitution know that the people would rise up, so i dont see them being stupid enough to try it for now, but WE MUST BE EVER WATCHFULL ALWAYS!!! the enemy NEVER attacks while you are expecting it. I also bet their were Americans down in louisiana who stood up for their gun rights but maybe they hid instead of fought and you didnt hear about them. but im sure some did stand up, maybe even were arrested, but still stood up.
    Coming from someone trying to burn a local dealer.OK
     

    flagtag

    Master
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Apr 27, 2008
    3,330
    38
    Westville, IL
    RE: What happened in NO. ???

    NO= ???? Please when reporting such serious events to post as much detail as you can so others in other parts of the USA? can be alerted!

    The more we can show a "pattern" the more successful we will be in stopping gun grabs.

    .

    New Orleans, LA. The police and military forced their way into homes (no warrant), threatened the residents, and stole their firearms and left them (residents) defenceless, and forced some of them into "shelters".

    (This later prompted Bush to push for a law forbidding such actions in emergencies. Many states followed suit.)
     

    Bill of Rights

    Cogito, ergo porto.
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    7   0   0
    Apr 26, 2008
    18,096
    77
    Where's the bacon?
    New Orleans, LA. The police and military forced their way into homes (no warrant), threatened the residents, and stole their firearms and left them (residents) defenceless, and forced some of them into "shelters".

    (This later prompted Bush to push for a law forbidding such actions in emergencies. Many states followed suit.)

    Including, now, Indiana! :rockwoot:
     
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Dec 21, 2008
    393
    18
    Hobart
    Either way, I'll be d@mned if anyone will take my firearms while I am still living. How else can we protect ourselves from the protectors? People have to take this as a life or death matter, cause when the time comes to "ban" our rights to defend ourselves, it will be a "life or death" situation. Either you give up or weapons and/or be killed and we'll take them anyway, or fight back, both legislatively and physically.

    People can't just shrug off these confrontations as moot encounters, you have to excersise your rights and take no **** from anyone. We know the laws, we abide by them, so we deserve the right to protect/use them.
     
    Last edited by a moderator:

    bman

    Plinker
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Mar 15, 2010
    66
    6
    be hard to take everyone's guns but given time and doing it a little at a time... could be done. easier to put a high tax on ammo. also.....short shelf life for ammo?
     
    Top Bottom