Give up your guns |
 |
50.5% (738) |
Kill the person who tries to take it from you |
|
10.3% (150) |
Try to hide your guns |
|
16.6% (243) |
other |
|
22.6% (330) |
Poll: Lets pretend the government passes a law stating that you can't have a gun anymore... Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 . . . 26 NEXT | |
Bet it wouldn't. Then they'd start suing people... | |
What the fuck? How big is your idea of the "western world"?
That's looking likely. Either way, it probably would just make things worse, arming a shitload of untrained, disorganised civilians. Even if they won out it probably wouldn't have been worth it for the losses. But this is all theoretical | |
Conspiracy theorists would definitely take it the hardest. The passing of such a law would be all the evidence they needed that the government was disarming the populace for a military takeover. | |
What I found interesting in looking into the Swiss system is that even though everyone that has been trained as part of the militia (which is basically everyone. Or at least, all the men) has a military issue rifle. HOWEVER, the swiss laws with regard to ammunition are incredibly strict; In the past you were given a sealed box with 50 rounds for the rifle, (intended to be in case something happened and you needed to use the gun prior to getting to a military facility). But the box was sealed, and there were regular inspections to ensure you hadn't been tampering with it. A gun without ammo isn't much of a weapon really. | |
I was being totally sarcastic. | |
Alright, so they are coming for my old Lee Enfield rifle. I'd probably just bring it to be decommissioned since I have never fired it anyway and mostly just hold on to it because my dad gave it to me when I got my long guns license (which was mostly just a fun way to spend a day with some friends.) So not really that big a drama for me even as a gun owner. Then again I'm Canadian and live in the city so I don't even keep the rifle at home, I left it with my dad who keeps it in a locked safe with his guns (which again almost never see use, since my dad hasn't gone target shooting since before I was born.) | |
Hunting, target shooting, sport shooting, home defense, military living history, reenacting, exercising constitutional right, responsible fun. ^My reasons brah. EDIT: Sorry, OT: I bet that there would be a shitstorm and possibly a regime change. While it is true that the US has the best military on earth, i doubt they could protect EVERY federal building/agent/and property from bombings/shootings/arson/and subterfuge. I bet several politicians would be assassinated and the government would be paralyzed, leading Obama to declare martial law. The National Guard probably couldn't/wouldn't be called up due to fear of desertion and their unwillingness to fire upon citizens,so it would be up to the Marines and the Army to restore order, which i'm not certain if they could. The states would recall their reserves from the military, which is within their rights, but the martial law would turn those troops over to a federal command, so civil war could break out over the power struggle. But then again, that's only an educated guess. | |
I'm keeping appraised of the situation to ensure this is never a decision I'd have to make. Suffice it to say, I own several firearms, and I will not give them up to anyone. If it came to this, I would try to intimidate my way out(I have several places I could go where no one would ever find me) but if I had to yes I would kill to keep my firearms. Without firearms I am simply a victim waiting for an attacker, a slave waiting for a master, and I refuse to put myself in that situation. I also have a number of plans for if there are too many of them for me to get out and I am forced to turn over my guns. I don't intend to share the details, but suffice it to say that making weapons far more dangerous than firearms is remarkably easy. | |
Well do NERF guns count for this also? If so Imma hide the shit outa my guns. But if just actual guns, I would give my guns up, since I don't own any. | |
Like many of you, I'd be completely unaffected by such a law. I don't own any guns, and I live in Massachusetts, where hardly anyone else owns any guns. I'd be really curious to see what happens in states with less strict gun laws. I've spoken to people on both sides, and it seems like there's a downside either way. | |
I don't need a gun to feel safe. | |
And I'm sure if push came to shove the police and army would be ready eager and willing ot do just that to all the people who think that's the best course of action. :-) (not a slag on Souleks, he's just the one that provided the shortest quotable opening. Thanks Souleks :-) ) The gun culture severely over estimates the amount of popularity they weild in the US. Cause remember... if a bunch of gun nuts say "fuck the government, you won't take my guns, viva la revolution!" the government will go, "domestic terrorists, traitors" and stomp on them so fast and so hard it'll hurt. They might face massive backlash from the public and the courts after the fact but they'll still do it. Hell I say even the Republicans and tea party would support that cause they'd be against the gun control laws, but they sure as hell wouldn't want a civil war rocking the boat. Plus if a bunch of wackoes start going ape-shit they'll simply frighten all the moderatives and liberals into thinking that this was needed and should be supported. God, as a Canadian I really have to thank the US for the massive amounts of entertainment you keep providing us. **grabs the popcorn and watches the US implode a bit more** As for me? Gun control is idiotic and pointless. Banning guns doesn;t do squat. You simply have to deal with the wackoes and criminals. Help the people who are desperate and mentally disturbed and get rid of the really crazy weapons. (like I don't think anyone needs military grade weapontry your amendment be damned. It was written when people had muskets and flintlock pistols not uzis and double barreled sawed off shotguns :-p) And ot answer the OP. I have a gun they pass a law, I demand compensation for the gun and hand it over. Not worth getting into with with the government over. Then try and get it legally overturned and get the gun back and more compensation for the hassle and inconvience. | |
Might wanna double check, the new proposed law is far far stricter, and bans numerous weapons that weren't covered under the old law.
Because it's our right. I could post numerous reasons, from the pages and pages of data that shows it's safer(from a crime standpoint) for the people when we have guns; to the fact that governments have murdered many times more of their own people over the last century than have died in all the murders and suicides, and wars from that time combined; to the fact that we have thousands of dollars invested in our firearms each and the government couldn't afford to pay gun owners even pennies on the dollar for our legally purchased firearms; but the biggest reason is because it is our right. It is our right to own firearms to protect ourselves from criminals, invaders, and even tyrants, and as Americans we believe in our rights enough to fight, to kill and even die for them. We've done it time and time again, and we won't stop. | |
May I advise you look up Shotgun and Firearm Certificates? We just have strict gun control. | |
And what happens if you purchase a firearm without those licenses? You can't purchase a firearm for self defense, you can't carry a loaded firearm and any firearm you do manage to get a license for must be kept in a locked cabinet with the ammunition being kept in a separate locked cabinet. It is illegal to own assault rifles or anything along those lines. On top of that the licenses you need to own a fire arm are not easy to get hold of. It's not a case of "give me license now" and they give you one. By "illegal" I meant joe public can't own firearms. Those with licenses already know what they can and can't do and heaven help them if they fuck up. The law does not go easy on them. | |
It saddens me that a nation that attempts to promote decromacy is so insecure about their own government that the idea of banning guns inevitably leads to people claiming they need guns to keep their government under control. I understand that part of the resistance is cultural, stemming from the weapon being glorified from the revolution and such, but the contrast between democracy and the fear of government suppression is bizarre. | |
Ehh i don't think that war would last that long.... we have tanks and helicopters now as well as military bases everywhere anyone who would think of starting another civil war would most likely be dead within 3 hours | |
Looking at the results from the poll, I reckon there must be a subset of Escapists who are happy to break the law and hide firearms, possibly even kill to keep them, but who think piracy is the most abominable thing a person can do, and that they should face severe legal repercussions. Just seems amusing, is all. Obviously, living in Britain, the closest thing I have to a firearm is my Nerf gun. If they came after that I would hand it in, and then be a little annoyed for about 2 seconds. | |
Well I have two registered guns, and 8 guns from my grandfather who recently passed that were around prior to the gun registration act. If they come to my door it depends on how they ask. If they ask me for the guns that I have registered I would give them to me, if they ask for all guns in the household it would depend on if they were compensating me, and if I thought I would be searched. My guns are all locked away in a gunsafe in my attic so I'm pretty sure they wouldn't find it, but if I feel I am likely to be caught (and I probably would as I don't like to break the law), I would give them up. I would also be very pissed about it, as the firearms are all I have left of my grandfather's stuff (the rest was in a storage facility that was broken in to). | |
Assuming I had guns and this happened, I'd probably try to hide them. Being registered would make that harder, but you can always report them stolen can't you? | |
We aren't allowed to own military grade weaponry. People from other countries often confuse what they mean when they say assault weapons. We aren't allowed to own automatic weapons, and we aren't allowed to own sawed off shotguns, both of those are already banned and perfectly illegal (though it hasn't stopped our criminals from owning them). They also want to ban many semi-automatic pistols (think one shot per trigger pull), and semi-automatic rifles. Meanwhile all of the sniper grade weapons we use for hunting would remain perfectly legal, as would the revolver shotguns (see Judge). I honestly don't think anything we have that is currently legal should be banned. More restrictions and safety checks, yes, but outright bans, no. | |
You know, if we pass a law that outlaws firearms there won't be any more shootings. Now if only someone would think to pass a law like that for things like heroin and cocaine. Oh, wait.... | |
Not care, but the government hear in the US wont. hunting is too big of a sport and states like PA, OH, WV, etc would never pass it because its too integral to their identity (not to mention any hunting fees and taxes I think go to the state). EDIT:
Actually, batman does and has used a gun in issues of his comic. | |
Bingo. Physically, I'm a weed. In an actual up close confrontation, without a serious equalizer, I am DEAD. Second, guns are my trade. I'd be out of a job in such a scenario.
When I have a multi billion dollar company under my control as well as a butler trained in combat medicine and a girl genius for tech support, I'll give up my guns happily. But we can't all have Waynetech at our disposal, dear. | |
For those of us who are 107 pounds soaking wet and have one useless leg, no, it would not be fun. | |
Only when other get over the issue that our situations and circumstances are not the same as theirs, and also when others can explain how I'm going to be protected in compensation for removing firearms seeing as the police here do not protect us. | |
Assuming I had a gun, I would probably try to hide it. Considering the kind of outrage from those kinds of people mentioned in the OP (and the fact that they make up the majority of where I live), the widespread fighting and possibly looting that would happen if such a law were passed, I want something to protect myself and I don't think my machete will do the trick against a bunch of angry rednecks. | |
Sell a few for looks, hide the rest. In reality though I'd probably have to keep them all for the civil war that ensued. Banning guns would only cause more violence... | |
Give them up. The consequences for not giving up the gun(s) wouldn't be worth having one. | |
OT: I'm not a gun owner, but I'd buy one and hide if if this actually happened. The govt banning all guns would be a really big sign that Bad Things are on the horizon. But, as others have said, it's a pretty fantastical scenario.
This isn't a good analogy. Many in the pro-gun crowd feel that an armed citizenry is a hedge against tyranny, especially since many of the Founding Fathers held the same belief. A blanket ban on all guns, in their minds, would enable the government to move toward dictatorship unopposed. And that kind of ban is so contrary to the Constitution that there's no reason to believe those in charge wouldn't be pursuing this end. In practice, I dunno if I buy that the general population could win a fight against the military/police if the latter groups threw their lots in with the dictator-to-be. But in theory, it makes sense. But yeah, not the same thing.
You're thinking of "militia" as "a body of citizens enrolled for military service, and called out periodically for drill but serving full time only in emergencies." Most pro-gun folks would argue the Founders wrote the Second Amendment with "a body of citizen soldiers as distinguished from professional soldiers" in mind, who could be "a body of citizens organized in a paramilitary group and typically regarding themselves as defenders of individual rights against the presumed interference of the federal government" if shit went down. And they'd say "regulated" as in "adjusted so as to ensure accuracy of operation" rather than "controlled or directed by a rule, principle, method, etc." (defs from dictionary.com) The US had no standing army at the time, and many of the Founders envisioned national defense being handled by the common man grabbing his gun and going off to fight the invaders. They also hoped that should the govt start acting so bad that it deserved overthrowing, those citizens would grab their guns and handle it. Maybe ridiculously idealistic, but it's silly to assume they wrote the Second Amendment saying, "Ok, we need to put it in the Bill of Rights that our military is allowed to have weapons." I'll be honest, the Swiss system where everyone is trained would prolly work better. But it's not really in line with US America's idealization of the Individual, vs. Europe's idealization of the Citizen. | |
Realistically, a lot of people would hide them somewhere, the government wouldn't bother looking for them, and, for the most part, we'd all just pretend they didn't exist. Nobody can go hunting without being obvious, so they'd just stay hidden and eventually forgotten. Millions and millions of guns in attics, basements, garages, walls, and floors, hidden away against the day when their owners go to the nursing home and their children clear out their stuff and have to shame-facedly call the police to pick up the old firearm that gramps had hid in his closet all those years ago. It'd get to be a running joke where fixer-uppers move into an house, start to do some electrical work or plumbing or drywall, and find an abandoned gun in there. | |
Well, I thought it was a pretty sweet analogy. Lot of depth to it, like the Atlantic Ocean. But ya...On to your point. Tyranny. Got to hate it. Good thing we got all those Americans, who by virtue of owning a gun(s), are preventing some epic black Tyranny plague from occurring... | |
do we NEED them? no. i'd give em up. (please note, i do not actually own any guns, this is hypothetical) I can't believe any body would answer "kill them", that's obvious trolling right there, or the sign of a complete lunatic. | |
I'd probably leave the country. They take one right away, they'll take another. I've never misused my fire arms. I'm not going to be punished because a couple of idiots decided being trigger happy. I'm not going to let some law breaker lead to my rights being taken away. I guess being fluent in three different languages is a good thing these days. One bullet at a time, baby. Don't like it? Leave me alone. Especially if you're not from America. The loudest opinions here are from people who aren't even from the country/have never been there. Ever been raped? Ever had a gun held up to your face? Ever been beaten? I'm doubtful. The law didn't help me at all. I'm not about to ever let that happen again. | |
| Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 . . . 26 NEXT | |
Not that I'm really looking to get into a gun debate, but handguns are illegal in Britain. Meaning anyone with a handgun has acquired it via black market means. And if they've acquired it via black market means, they probably intend to commit some crime, or have at least shown themselves to already have disregard for the law.
Speaking in terms of America, where such things can be acquired legally, yes. Licensed handguns are a good thing. I'd probably have situation training required on a national level before being able to have a carry permit/purchase a handgun, though.