Police make plans for confiscation of firearms

[KG1]

I don't know who you are. I don't know what you want. If you are looking for ransom, I can tell you I don't have money. But what I do have are a very particular set of skills; skills I have acquired over a very long career. Skills that make me a nightmare for people like you. If you let my daughter go now, that'll be the end of it. I will not look for you, I will not pursue you. But if you don't, I will look for you, I will find you, and I will kill you.

Liam Neeson = Awesome. That is all.

 

[jbombelli]

I not taking any law abiding person's weapons. No way.

If you caught someone today who was in possession of an unlicensed machine gun in violation of Indiana law, and had no criminal record, would you let them go with their machine gun? What if it was a sawed-off shotgun?

What about the rest of Indiana's law enforcement community? Would they?

If you would take that machine gun or sawed-off shotgun, or others would take it, and jail and charge the person who had it, why should we believe you wouldn't do the same if/when they ban the possession of OTHER weapons? After all, if a person is in possession of an illegal weapon, he's not exactly "law abiding", is he?

 

[ssylvester]

Manhattan is full of the peoplewhoarespreading allthe lies about "assault weapons" via network news. Its ironic that they are the same people whobbring us the Jersey Shore and make sure we know who Ashton Kutcher is sleeping with. If we really want to curb gun violence let's keep Manhattan, Bloombergs little kingdom from spreading thier filth to the rest of our country!!!!!

 

[Quad]

If you caught someone today who was in possession of an unlicensed machine gun in violation of Indiana law, and had no criminal record, would you let them go with their machine gun? What if it was a sawed-off shotgun?

What about the rest of Indiana's law enforcement community? Would they?

If you would take that machine gun or sawed-off shotgun, or others would take it, and jail and charge the person who had it, why should we believe you wouldn't do the same if/when they ban the possession of OTHER weapons? After all, if a person is in possession of an illegal weapon, he's not exactly "law abiding", is he?

Good question!

Eagerly awaiting the reply

 

[ssylvester]

Good question!

Eagerly awaiting the reply

Lets just pray there is no ban and if so, than there is no possesion clause. The librals are already losing focus, look at MSN, it's all celeb gossip and nothing about guns. The will and the intelligence is on our side.

 

[Denny347]

If you caught someone today who was in possession of an unlicensed machine gun in violation of Indiana law, and had no criminal record, would you let them go with their machine gun? What if it was a sawed-off shotgun?

What about the rest of Indiana's law enforcement community? Would they?

If you would take that machine gun or sawed-off shotgun, or others would take it, and jail and charge the person who had it, why should we believe you wouldn't do the same if/when they ban the possession of OTHER weapons? After all, if a person is in possession of an illegal weapon, he's not exactly "law abiding", is he?

The first scenario sounds VERY familiar, that is all I will say about it on a public forum .

 

[J D]

One thing you might want to keep in mind. Unless there is a ban passed by the state legislature it would probably only be Federal. Local law enforcement would not be enforcing or initiating much of anything. Just as they can't arrest for federal laws not covered by state statute.

 

[NapalmFTW]

They banned handguns in the UK and had a forced buyback,

Then again we had gun registration over there too.

 

[HeadlessRoland]

A general confiscation order might well be disobeyed by many LEOs in the gun-friendlier parts of the country.

But what about an order that is targeted at one kind of gun and one individual? Imagine this future scenario:

"Since semi-automatic rifles are now illegal to possess, we've been asking John Smith at 201 Elm St. to either turn in his rifle or tell us where it went. He has done neither. Now we have a warrant to enter his house and search for it. Your orders are to serve this warrant. You will confiscate any weapons that are illegal under Federal or state law, but you may ignore any shotguns or revolvers you find today because those are legal."

How many LEOs would refuse THAT order? Or the next order ("Serve this warrant and confiscate the .357 revolver and pump-action shotgun that Jane Jones is known to have purchased, but ignore double barrel shotguns and .22lr revolvers, because they are legal.") or the one after that?

Casting no aspersions on INGO members in law enforcement, I think far fewer LEOs would refuse targeted, narrow orders like the ones above. And it wouldn't take too many publicized raids to get 90-95% of law-abiding gun owners to fall in line and decide it just isn't worth it anymore.

Would you give them up and live in fear until the day that the knock on the door comes, or refuse and be prepared for tyranny? One way or another, they will demand submission - will you submit or be free?

You can only die but once: you only live twice.

 

[Jack Burton]

Before you all go making predictions you might want to read this article...

Gun Restrictions Have Always Bred Defiance, Black Markets - Reason.com

 

[JetGirl]

you only live twice.

YOL[STRIKE]O[/STRIKE]T

 

[GI JOE]

Quoting Mr. Heston...

"FROM MY COLD, DEAD HANDS!"

 

[cbhausen]

Let's Choose Our Words Carefully...

Here's a copy-and-paste of this thread's title followed by the title of the article the OP shared:

Police make plans for confiscation of firearms
Police Wonder If They’ll Need To Confiscate Weapons In Event Of Ban « CBS New York

Does anyone see the difference? Hopefully so, it's a big one. To the OP, thanks for sharing and I sure wish we could EDIT the titles of our threads.

 

[netsecurity]

Watch the vidio in this link. From her own lips, she wants to make military style assault weapons to be treated as machine guns. NFA firearms, even those that are currently owned.

Feinstein's 'assault weapon' ban would be tantamount to confiscation - St. Louis gun rights | Examiner.com

This is serious stuff, I think y ou agree.

I agree with this last statement:

Even without confiscation, Feinstein's bill is a new "Intolerable Act," and a direct violation of her oath of office. With it, it's an act of war against the American people. That is a war that she and her allies will lose.

As far as I'm concerned, Feinstein, Cuomo, Pierce Morgan et all, have all ready declared war. Someone should take the fight to them--oust them from office, or have them arrested as traitors. This is treachery and tyranny, and what the founders warned us of. They will not stop until they take all of our freedom...

 

[Lex Concord]

I not taking any law abiding person's weapons. No way.

Ah, but if a law were to pass enabling such orders to be issued, those targeted would, by definition, no longer be law-abiding persons, no?

Even if you would let newly-illegal weapons slide, or would even risk your employment and retirement by refusing such an order or even walking off the job rather than enforce it, how many of your brethren do you think would do the same?

I have to guess it would be less than 50%...not a cop thing...just a human nature thing. I pray I'm wrong, but history shows otherwise.

 

[darrent]

I could easily see the new partnerships forming between the DHS and local law enforcement enabling the locals to help enforce federal laws. Another source of enforcement could be the civilian security force that POTUS promised would rival the military in power and funding. Since we're going off the cliff, matching the funding of the military will not be as difficult. The planned gun control has been in the works for a while now. They will have the pieces in place before any radical changes come down.

Law Enforcement Partnerships | Homeland Security
Obama’s “Civilian National Security Force”

 

[Lex Concord]

Would you give them up and live in fear until the day that the knock on the door comes, or refuse and be prepared for tyranny? One way or another, they will demand submission - will you submit or be free?

You can only die but once: you only live twice.

This appears often in these pages, but could never be quoted too frequently...

And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if every Security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say good-bye to his family? Or if, during periods of mass arrests, as for example in Leningrad, when they arrested a quarter of the entire city, people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling with terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand?... The Organs would very quickly have suffered a shortage of officers and transport and, notwithstanding all of Stalin's thirst, the cursed machine would have ground to a halt! If...if...We didn't love freedom enough. And even more – we had no awareness of the real situation.... We purely and simply deserved everything that happened afterward.

 

[j706]

Ah, but if a law were to pass enabling such orders to be issued, those targeted would, by definition, no longer be law-abiding persons, no?

Even if you would let newly-illegal weapons slide, or would even risk your employment and retirement by refusing such an order or even walking off the job rather than enforce it, how many of your brethren do you think would do the same?

I have to guess it would be less than 50%...not a cop thing...just a human nature thing. I pray I'm wrong, but history shows otherwise.

I can say with confidence it will be more like 99% where I work and most likely 100% that would not enforce those type laws.

As for a felon making full auto guns selling them to who knows who and with a prior for the same...hes going down. Been there done that. I would do the same again.

 

[Denny347]

Even if you would let newly-illegal weapons slide, or would even risk your employment and retirement by refusing such an order or even walking off the job rather than enforce it, how many of your brethren do you think would do the same?

Based on previous experience, my statement holds true for me and many of my co-workers as long as your not doing anything else illegal...etc. If that is not a satisfactory answer I am sorry, I will not go into details.