2nd Amendment Repealed. Now What?!

[Revolution]

cliffordu (27,058 posts)







 

OK - So let's say we repeal the second amendment.

 Allow people handguns with short magazines and bolt action rifles.

Nothing else, no "assault weapons"

Who is going to be responsible for gathering up all those ugly black guns with the bayonet mounts and the suppressors and the big magazines?
 

How many "gun nuts" would fight to the death? Would their slaughter and the killing of those (10,000? 20,000?, 100,000?) tasked with the removal of said guns be worth it to rid the US of "gun nuts"? (you know, the bloodthirsty small peckered variety so deeply loved here in DU.....)
 
Are you willing to kill a million people to take ugly guns away? two million?? five million?
 
What would you use to remove these guns? The military and their firepower? Turned wholesale against the civilian population?
 
If you use the military, how are they going to restrict movement so guns cannot be smuggled out of areas not yet searched into already 'cleansed' areas??
 
At gunpoint.

I think banning ugly guns is fine, except that it will solve nothing. That's because once you've banned them, you have to take them away from your neighbors. And that is a whole 'nother thing, amigo.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021003218

Now....what exactly were you saying about my pecker, junior?


Seriously though, if they tried taking the firearms away from everybody in this country, not may would give them up for one. For another thing, it would cost way too much money, and manpower to even try to attempt this. The DUmmy's right in this cast. Absolutely stupid idea.

[franksolich]

I still say that banning guns would have the same effect as what happened when alcohol was banned ninety years ago.

Ban guns, and everybody and his uncle and his dog and cat will want, and get, a gun.

And the market would be controlled, as that in alcohol had been, by undesirable elements rather than respectable law-abiding people and enterprises.....and coindentially, difficult to regulate and tax.

We all know how the primitives love regulations and taxes.

[WinOne4TheGipper]

You can put down the bong.  As I explained the other day, any reapeal of the 2nd amendment takes 38 states.  You probably have no more than a handful.  Sorry.

[JohnnyReb]

I see an old song shooting to #1 on the the top 40 list....

"I shot the sheriff"

[Bondai]

This has always been a DUmmie wet dream, but there is no way that it would ever happen the idea borders on insanity. Raise your hands out there CU...how many of you will peacefully stand in line like a sheep and turn your guns in like they did in England.......

[JohnnyReb]

This has always been a DUmmie wet dream, but there is no way that it would ever happen the idea borders on insanity. Raise your hands out there CU...how many of you will peacefully stand in line like a sheep and turn your guns in like they did in England.......

Only after we've made sure that they are in perfect working order...get my drift?

[jukin]

I think it will be less than 5000 dead gun grabbers before the gun grabbers decide they don't want to take guns away.

[DumbAss Tanker]

I think it will be less than 5000 dead gun grabbers before the gun grabbers decide they don't want to take guns away.

I'd rather not find out.  Like Waco and innumerable other cluster****s, once the government starts something stupid, they are extremely unwilling to drop back and recalculate the original wisdom of it.

[JohnnyReb]

I'd rather not find out.  Like Waco and innumerable other cluster****s, once the government starts something stupid, they are extremely unwilling to drop back and recalculate the original wisdom of it.

I think it would make a difference where you took the 5,000 from. Do you take them from the top or the bottom? 500 from the top would probably stop it dead in it's tracks.

[Airwolf]

Lets ask the Canadians how well their attempt to get all the long guns registered worked for them.

1. Cost over 2 Billion in Canadian dollars for a system to register shotguns and rifles that was supposed to only cost about 100 million at best.

2. Most Canadian gun owners refused to register their rifles and shotguns.

3. It was never going to be followed by criminals anyway.

[JohnnyReb]

Lets ask the Canadians how well their attempt to get all the long guns registered worked for them.

1. Cost over 2 Billion in Canadian dollars for a system to register shotguns and rifles that was supposed to only cost about 100 million at best.

2. Most Canadian gun owners refused to register their rifles and shotguns.

3. It was never going to be followed by criminals anyway.

...and U.S.A. DUmmies still don't and will never get that point.

[Kyle Ricky]

Ok. I am going to put on my independent hat here and probably get bitch slapped for it as well.

My thoughts is not to repeal the 2nd amendment, I am a stout believer of the 2nd. But name a time that you need to use an ak47 to go hunting?

[JohnnyReb]

Ok. I am going to put on my independent hat here and probably get bitch slapped for it as well.

My thoughts is not to repeal the 2nd amendment, I am a stout believer of the 2nd. But name a time that you need to use an ak47 to go hunting?

For those times when a DUmmie thinks that the government has entitled him to use the tree stand that you bought, paid for, lugged into the woods and mounted.

Personally, I'd go for a 12 ga. and deer shot.

[DumbAss Tanker]

Ok. I am going to put on my independent hat here and probably get bitch slapped for it as well.

My thoughts is not to repeal the 2nd amendment, I am a stout believer of the 2nd. But name a time that you need to use an ak47 to go hunting?

Where does it say "...But only for hunting" in the Second Amendment?

[67 Rover]

Where does it say "...But only for hunting" in the Second Amendment?

Yea this. ^

[Kyle Ricky]

Where does it say "...But only for hunting" in the Second Amendment?

It doesn't  But seriously when do you? Believe, I am all for if you want to own one. But I think it should just be limited to target practice and showing off at gun shows.

[Chris_]

It doesn't  But seriously when do you? Believe, I am all for if you want to own one. But I think it should just be limited to target practice and showing off at gun shows.

Using that logic, owning a car should be limited to the purposes of driving to work and back. 

[Kyle Ricky]

Using that logic, owning a car should be limited to the purposes of driving to work and back.  

So you agree with using an AK-47 for hunting? Imagine how much of the deer would be left if you used it? I am guessing none 

[Chris_]

There are some big deer around here.

[Kyle Ricky]

There are some big deer around here.

You should see some of the elk up around where my wife is from. Talk about huge.

[FiddyBeowulf]

But name a time that you need to use an ak47 to go hunting?

A real full auto AK47 or semiauto clone?

[BlueStateSaint]

So you agree with using an AK-47 for hunting? Imagine how much of the deer would be left if you used it? I am guessing none  

Seeing that the 7.62x39 round is slightly less of a performer than the ol' .30 Winchester Center Fire, there'd be a fair amount.  One of my co-workers uses one for deer because his divorce pretty much tapped him out of the funds he was going to use for a Savage 110 in .30-06, and he already had the AK.

[IassaFTots]

Where does it say "...But only for hunting" in the Second Amendment?

Hi 5.

[FiddyBeowulf]

Seeing that the 7.62x39 round is slightly less of a performer than the ol' .30 Winchester Center Fire, there'd be a fair amount.  One of my co-workers uses one for deer because his divorce pretty much tapped him out of the funds he was going to use for a Savage 110 in .30-06, and he already had the AK.

I know people who use SKS rifles for the same reason.

[ExGeeEye]

So you agree with using an AK-47 for hunting? Imagine how much of the deer would be left if you used it? I am guessing none 

1.  A full auto no-shit Soviet Red Army Infantry AK-47 is illegal as hell in the USA right now, without an anal exam of a background check and a $300 tax on top of whatever ungodly amount you'd have to pay for the weapon itself.  The "AK-47s" available for (relatively) easy sale are semiautomatics.  They are ugly and easily demonizable by those with an agenda (you, perhaps?) but mechanically inferior to a WW2 M-1 Garand in almost every respect (and you can -- still --buy those from the government!).

2.  Any jackass who would empty a 30-round mag into a deer deserves the few pounds of usable meat he would find in the carcass.  A well-placed, controlled three-round burst, on the other hand, wouldn't do any more damage than three rounds from a bolt-action Remington 870.

3.  The Second Amendment isn't about hunting, anyway.  It's about ensuring that the People have access to weaponry sufficient to keep the government-- the People's servants and employees-- from getting too uppity.

4.  The American Way of Rights has never been about need, either.  The whole idea is that we have the right, the freedom, the liberty to do what we wanna, just because we wanna, with damfew restrictions that basically amount to "my right to swing my fist ends at the tip of your nose."