Originally Posted by sven hassell

I have recently been watching a fair few pro-gun films and debates on you tube.
Most of them have this view: The Australian and British gun owners 'gave up' and that Americans would NEVER surrender their firearms.
The constant opinion voiced by American gun owners is that they would die rather than be disarmed.
Is this really true? If the US government banned semi auto long guns or all pistols tomorrow how many citizens would put their money where their mouth is?
We Brits and Australians tried to protest but were ignored,I know there are some Americans who would have it end in a seige (waco shows this) but would the average law abiding gun owner in the US throw away everything (job,family,liberty or even life) to prove a point or would they comply with the law even though they disagreed with it because they ARE law abiding?
I hope they would.As much as I want you guys to keep your freedoms,especially that of being armed I would hate to see numerous instances of law abiding family men(and women) becoming criminals and being locked away or worse.
So if you are a US citizen. What would you really do if you had 24hours to surrender your weapons?
I would like to know so I can decide whether all these 'from my dead hands' statements are just an emphasis of a peoples belief in something or whether common folk are latently suicidal and would throw away everything just because they have a bad government.????

Sooo..... Original topic anyone?


I'd be glad to continue this oh-so-helpful discussion on how wrong I am in a PM though, Spike. [/sarcasm]

Originally Posted by Rob Henderson

Sooo..... Original topic anyone?


I'd be glad to continue this oh-so-helpful discussion on how wrong I am in a PM though, Spike. [/sarcasm]

Remember Rob, you are not a Moderator, I am.

Wouldn't you agree we've wandered a bit?

Originally Posted by Rob Henderson

Wouldn't you agree we've wandered a bit?

I do.

On the original topic, I highly doubt that there will ever be a full firearms recall, because it would be too difficult; though the majority of Americans would be no different than Britons or Australians, there would be a considerable number that would take "from my cold dead hands" to heart. And guess which group the media would report on.

Originally Posted by the_13th_redneck

When I look back at all the things I believed in when I was 19...


1) You believe anything and everything (even if you think you don't)
2) You believe in nothing except bull sh*t (usually one love, one world, hold hands sort of bull sh*t)
3) You don't believe in anything anymore.

How about 4) You believe in yourself.


And BTW 13th - I reckon that your post was a very good post indeed.

Cheers Del Boy.

13th, I only said it because it is true; I am often struck at how well measured your responses can be. You could be instructing a bright class in that respect, and I find it impressive. I did not wish to sound patronising, I would not go there; respect, that's all.

Originally Posted by sven hassell

I have recently been watching a fair few pro-gun films and debates on you tube.
Most of them have this view: The Australian and British gun owners 'gave up' and that Americans would NEVER surrender their firearms.
The constant opinion voiced by American gun owners is that they would die rather than be disarmed.
Is this really true? If the US government banned semi auto long guns or all pistols tomorrow how many citizens would put their money where their mouth is?

Given from your hypothetical statement "the US government banned semi auto long guns or all pistols tomorrow.'
Who would enforce it?
Being a federal ban, the local police would not be automatically charged with enforcing it.
State and local governments have not been willing to enforce federal immigration laws. In California medicinal Marijuana shops operate legally under California law in defiance of federal law.

Homeland security is tasked with coordinating various law enforcement agencies and doesn't have unlimited field police powers.
Basically only the FBI and ATF could be used to enforce this ban. They do not have anything close to the number of officers it would take to enforce.

A federal ban might well be seen by state governments as intruding on states rights. The state governments might actually be forced to defend their citizens rights. (Not because they didn't want the ban, but because they would consider it a tactic to takeover state powers).

If you assume that this ban is somehow legal then it would have to be some what enforced legally. They could go door to door and ask for the guns. If people said come back with a warrant then that would have to be done. (No clear concise records of who owns what guns exists).
Using Federal troops to enforce it would be illegal.

Originally Posted by sven hassell

We Brits and Australians tried to protest but were ignored,I know there are some Americans who would have it end in a seige (waco shows this) but would the average law abiding gun owner in the US throw away everything (job,family,liberty or even life) to prove a point or would they comply with the law even though they disagreed with it because they ARE law abiding?

Without getting the states to ratify a Constitutional amendment changing the Second amendment or getting the Supreme Court to rule that it was legal, Americans would not see the ban as legal. So law abiding citizens would still consider themselves as law abiding in not turning in their guns. Similar to pot smoking for medicinal purposes as legal.

Originally Posted by sven hassell

I hope they would.As much as I want you guys to keep your freedoms,especially that of being armed I would hate to see numerous instances of law abiding family men(and women) becoming criminals and being locked away or worse.
So if you are a US citizen. What would you really do if you had 24hours to surrender your weapons?
I would like to know so I can decide whether all these 'from my dead hands' statements are just an emphasis of a peoples belief in something or whether common folk are latently suicidal and would throw away everything just because they have a bad government.????

You bet your a**. It has only been 233 years since we overthrew the last "bad" government.

When I enlisted in the military I swore to serve and defend the government. I took that seriously, to the point that when my enlistment ended, my allegiance didn't. If a ruling body violates what I swore allegiance too, I am still sworn to support a legitimate government. I may have over the years disagreed with the job the government is doing but it has not become a bad government yet.

In short your hypothetical question will remain hypothetical for the foreseeable future.

Chuckpike you make some very good points.
I particularly agree with your last two paragraphs.

Originally Posted by Chukpike

State and local governments have not been willing to enforce federal immigration laws. In California medicinal Marijuana shops operate legally under California law in defiance of federal law.

Homeland security is tasked with coordinating various law enforcement agencies and doesn't have unlimited field police powers.
Basically only the FBI and ATF could be used to enforce this ban. They do not have anything close to the number of officers it would take to enforce.

To put even more of a point on it.

Any United States Criminal Code would have to be written to allow enforcement of that USCC by Non-Federal LEA's or be adopted into the individual states criminal code. That would allow enforcement by State, City and County officers.

Currently several USCC's are unenforceable due to having no similar State Code and thus must be turned over to Federal LEA's. Until recently Immigration was a case in point. It was only to be enforced by ICE primarely and the FBI in some cases.....until state codes were passed thru the various state legislatures and partnerships with ICE were reached.

Here in lies the the rub. Yes a USCC could be passed and added to the books. But locals are bound to enforcing state and local criminal codes...all violations would have to be passed to Federal Agencies for enforcement,As chukpike pointed out this would probably land in the laps of the FBI & BATF&E, Niether of these agencies have enough agents to fan out across the entire country.

Stat legislator's in alot of areas of the country will be unwilling to add such a code unless they wish to see their political career in flames.