Would You Take Away Guns From Law-Abiding Citizens? [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : Would You Take Away Guns From Law-Abiding Citizens?


snerd
07-02-2012, 01:52
Roy Huntington at American Handgunner Magazine is conducting a poll and posted in American Cop Magazine.......
I was asked to write about this a long while ago, back when I was still a cop. I wrote the article and stated: I would not do it and, yes, Iíd risk the consequences. I signed my name to the article, and my agency knew it. I also said I didnít feel the vast majority of my LE peers would participate if they felt they were given an unlawful order to confiscate guns. But today? I honestly donít know what would happen. Whatís your opinion? You tell me.

By Roy Huntington

Reach me through the editor@americanhandgunner.com and I anxiously await your mail.

http://www.americancopmagazine.com/will-you-do-it/

Cavalry Doc
07-02-2012, 04:40
I, and about 5000 friends from 1st Cav were asked to do exactly that by the LA governor and the NO Mayor. We said no. Too bad everyone else didn't say no. Most did, but some didn't.

Ruble Noon
07-02-2012, 05:34
Interesting comments section.

certifiedfunds
07-02-2012, 06:38
I, and about 5000 friends from 1st Cav were asked to do exactly that by the LA governor and the NO Mayor. We said no. Too bad everyone else didn't say no. Most did, but some didn't.

Hats off to you and the 1st Cav, Doc.

HexHead
07-02-2012, 06:58
It should be noted that in the wake of the Katrina gun grab, several states passed laws banning gun confiscations during emergencies. TN was one of them.

The Machinist
07-02-2012, 08:11
I, and about 5000 friends from 1st Cav were asked to do exactly that by the LA governor and the NO Mayor. We said no. Too bad everyone else didn't say no. Most did, but some didn't.
God bless you! That was the act of a patriot.

Cavalry Doc
07-02-2012, 08:17
Hats off to you and the 1st Cav, Doc.

No sweat, it's not difficult NOT doing bad things.

JBnTX
07-02-2012, 08:19
Why doesn't Roy Huntington post a public poll instead of having LEO's contact him privately, where the results will only be known to him?

Sounds like a limp wristed way of making sure it's safe before going public with the information?

I'm betting that the majority of police officers will follow orders
and confiscate all firearms when told to do so.

Cops will talk smack on the internet, but in real life they'll do what they're told. They'll put themselves first and not risk their jobs.

..

Cavalry Doc
07-02-2012, 08:21
God bless you! That was the act of a patriot.

Maybe I'm mistaken. But I sense you are being a bit over the top. That call was made without hesitation by the task force commander supported unanimously by all the staff.

It's an illustration of the complete inadequacy and ignorance of the New Orleans and Louisiana elected government.

We also refused to forcibly evacuate citizens. Posse comitatus and the 2nd amendment trumped their requests, that's all.

rgregoryb
07-02-2012, 08:23
I am retired now, but as a LEO I would never confiscate firearms from law abiding citizens

Cavalry Doc
07-02-2012, 08:25
Why doesn't Roy Huntington post a public poll instead of having LEO's contact him privately, where the results will only be known to him?

Sounds like a limp wristed way of making sure it's safe before going public with the information?

I'm betting that the majority of police officers will follow orders
and confiscate all firearms when told to do so.

Cops will talk smack on the internet, but in real life they'll do what they're told.

A lot of that would depend on where you are. An urban cop in Chicago would probably not go the same way as a rural Constible in Texas.

The Machinist
07-02-2012, 08:30
Maybe I'm mistaken. But I sense you are being a bit over the top. That call was made without hesitation by the task force commander supported unanimously by all the staff.
I meant what I said, Doc. :supergrin:

Cavalry Doc
07-02-2012, 08:41
I meant what I said, Doc. :supergrin:

Sorry, my bad.

bruzer
07-02-2012, 09:59
This is the problem as I see it. Laws will be enacted. Not over night but over time. The Law Abiding Citizen will eventually become the law breaker if they don't voluntarily give up their guns when asked to do so. So when the Government moves in to confiscate guns they will be acting within the laws. You and I are now criminals and no longer Law Abiding Citizens. So when the question is asked, "Would you take away guns from Law-Abiding Citizens?". The answer is of coarse, "No". But unfortunately we will become the criminals when the time is right.
Good luck and stay safe,
Mike

Gunhaver
07-02-2012, 10:31
This is the problem as I see it. Laws will be enacted. Not over night but over time. The Law Abiding Citizen will eventually become the law breaker if they don't voluntarily give up their guns when asked to do so. So when the Government moves in to confiscate guns they will be acting within the laws. You and I are now criminals and no longer Law Abiding Citizens. So when the question is asked, "Would you take away guns from Law-Abiding Citizens?". The answer is of coarse, "No". But unfortunately we will become the criminals when the time is right.
Good luck and stay safe,
Mike

That's exactly it right there. Most cops would tell you that they think a 15 round mag is not too many for a civilian to have in his gun at one time but I'll bet every last one in California would bust you for having one. It's not about what they think is right. It's about the opportunity to make an arrest. Shotgun barrel a 1/4" too short? Snapped a foregrip on your Glock rail? Don't have just the right mix of import and domestic parts on your AK? If a cop catches you chances are it's jail time. Has nothing to do with lethality or anything other than what the legislators agreed on as far as the cops are concerned.

I have no reason to believe it would be any different if semi-autos or polymer frames or laser sights or just firearms altogether were made illegal.

Ruble Noon
07-02-2012, 10:33
That's exactly it right there. Most cops would tell you that they think a 15 round mag is not too many for a civilian to have in his gun at one time but I'll bet every last one in California would bust you for having one. It's not about what they think is right. It's about the opportunity to make an arrest. Shotgun barrel a 1/4" too short? Snapped a foregrip on your Glock rail? Don't have just the right mix of import and domestic parts on your AK? If a cop catches you chances are it's jail time. Has nothing to do with lethality or anything other than what the legislators agreed on as far as the cops are concerned.

I have no reason to believe it would be any different if semi-autos or polymer frames or laser sights or just firearms altogether were made illegal.

You support wealth confiscation so why not gun confiscation.

Gunhaver
07-02-2012, 11:05
You support wealth confiscation so why not gun confiscation.
You gonna follow me all around the forum shoving that up my a** now? This here is a different thread.

For 9 years now I've been a firearms instructor with a lot of liberal friends and I've been an ambassador to the shooting sports to every one of them. I have a standing offer to all my friends and anyone they know to come to the range with me and shoot a free box of ammo just to show them how much fun it can be. I've probably spent several thousand dollars on ammo in that time. I have 12 pistols and 3 rifles for them to choose from and I'd estimate that I'm personally responsible for convincing well over 100 people to go purchase their own handgun and more than half of them have gotten carry permits. I find my method much more effective than standing around here preaching to the choir. Last I checked this was a firearms forum, not an Obamacare haters forum.

So would you have me go back and unravel all that effort? Let every one of them know that the gun owners on Glocktalk don't want their support unless their political leanings all fall right in line with the GOP? All because you can't handle the fact that I have a sick friend and thought maybe ACA wouldn't be such a bad thing for her?

Some of you guys here are exactly what keeps a lot of people from wanting to learn anything about guns because you're exactly what they envision when they think of a gun owner. I guarantee that I've done a lot more to further the Second Amendment that you have but you could maybe catch up with me just by keeping your mouth shut for the next 9 years.

Cavalry Doc
07-02-2012, 11:23
You gonna follow me all around the forum shoving that up my a** now? This here is a different thread.

See, that's the problem. We all remember what you say in all the threads you post in, and will consider what you say forever more in that context. Don't fret about it, be comfortable in your own skin.

snerd
07-02-2012, 11:25
Statements have consequences.

Walt_NC
07-02-2012, 11:39
Noncompliace with an illegal order is easy. More difficult hypothitical scenario:

Let's say that the Constitution was amended in a legal manner so as to revoke and repeal the 2nd Amendment. Laws were passed prohibiting ownership of firearms and requiring them to be relinquished.

Would you, as a hypothetical cop, then obey your sworn oath to the rule of law and carry out the lawful order to confiscate guns?

Cavalry Doc
07-02-2012, 11:43
Some of you guys here are exactly what keeps a lot of people from wanting to learn anything about guns because you're exactly what they envision when they think of a gun owner. I guarantee that I've done a lot more to further the Second Amendment that you have but you could maybe catch up with me just by keeping your mouth shut for the next 9 years.


Nice claim, that you could not possibly know if it is correct. We all know how highly you think of yourself.

I doubt any of us are stopping any law abiding citizen from partaking in firearms enthusiasm. This is GTPI, not the carry issues forum. Don't mistake disapproval of your Marxist philosophy with disagreeing with your possible pro-RKBA positions.

Cavalry Doc
07-02-2012, 11:58
Noncompliace with an illegal order is easy. More difficult hypothitical scenario:

Let's say that the Constitution was amended in a legal manner so as to revoke and repeal the 2nd Amendment. Laws were passed prohibiting ownership of firearms and requiring them to be relinquished.

Would you, as a hypothetical cop, then obey your sworn oath to the rule of law and carry out the lawful order to confiscate guns?

I have a better hypothetical situation. Let's suppose the gun grabbers tried to amend the constitution in that manner, but we stopped them instead.

Gunhaver
07-02-2012, 12:07
Nice claim, that you could not possibly know if it is correct. We all know how highly you think of yourself.

I doubt any of us are stopping any law abiding citizen from partaking in firearms enthusiasm. This is GTPI, not the carry issues forum. Don't mistake disapproval of your Marxist philosophy with disagreeing with your possible pro-RKBA positions.

Do Marxists vote republican about 75% of the time and talk people into buying guns? You guys sure have fun with your labels. So you're cool with me popping up in any old thread and saying, "Hey Doc, remember that time you went on for 89 pages about how atheism was a religion because Websters dictionary said so and you couldn't wrap your head around the concept that it isn't and everyone was just wishing the thread would die but you wouldn't let it? Ha! What were you thinking? Good times man."

Of course I never would because that would be kinda D-baggish of me.

But I should have known better. I've been here long enough to know the drill. Express a difference of political opinion and get descended upon by a pack of hyenas. I wonder how many more members GT would have if that weren't the case. Wonder how much more money Eric would make.

rgregoryb
07-02-2012, 12:15
but if the cops confiscated the guns and gave them to the less fortunate, would that be OK?

Walt_NC
07-02-2012, 12:59
I have a better hypothetical situation. Let's suppose the gun grabbers tried to amend the constitution in that manner, but we stopped them instead.

Congratulations on your hypothetical victory.

But back to the very serious question posed by this thread: if the Constitution were legally and properly amended, following all procedures and protocols to result in the abolishing of the second amendment and then laws were passed to ban ownership of guns, would you obey your oath to the president, constitution, et al and execute a legitimate and lawful order to confiscate guns from otherwise law-abiding citizens?

Don H
07-02-2012, 13:14
You support wealth confiscation so why not gun confiscation.

:whistling:

barbedwiresmile
07-02-2012, 13:20
The whole premise of this question is flawed, based on how it is phrased. "Law abiding citizen"? By definition, when a law is passed restricting gun ownership, a citizen is technically no longer "law-abiding" if he does not abide by the restriction.

Today, as we discuss this, there are agents in various states enforcing that state's 2A restrictions - it's "the law".

So the question is moot.

Should the Supreme Court uphold draconian restrictions on 2A (which as we now know is not hard to imagine), agents everywhere would enforce those restrictions up to and including confiscation -- just as they do today.

If you're looking for a friend, get a dog. Don't look to the state (or its agents).

Cavalry Doc
07-02-2012, 14:12
Do Marxists vote republican about 75% of the time and talk people into buying guns? You guys sure have fun with your labels. So you're cool with me popping up in any old thread and saying, "Hey Doc, remember that time you went on for 89 pages about how atheism was a religion because Websters dictionary said so and you couldn't wrap your head around the concept that it isn't and everyone was just wishing the thread would die but you wouldn't let it? Ha! What were you thinking? Good times man."

Of course I never would because that would be kinda D-baggish of me.

But I should have known better. I've been here long enough to know the drill. Express a difference of political opinion and get descended upon by a pack of hyenas. I wonder how many more members GT would have if that weren't the case. Wonder how much more money Eric would make.

I'm sure I pointed out in those 80+ pages that I am very comfortable with the fact that atheism is a religion for those that are truly atheists. The definitions speak for themselves. I was never the one with the inability to see that the definitions fit, and that for many, it's correct in spirit too.

I'm sure it's possible that a Marxist could also be pro-RKBA. And that those two positions are not always mutually exclusive.

Which is why I advised that you should be comfortable in your own skin.

Tell you what I'll do, every time you bring it up, I'll respond to you in the thread in RI. I'll tell them you gave me the idea AND invite everyone in GTPI to join us in GTRI. Fair enough?

Lethaltxn
07-02-2012, 14:20
Do Marxists vote republican about 75% of the time and talk people into buying guns? You guys sure have fun with your labels. So you're cool with me popping up in any old thread and saying, "Hey Doc, remember that time you went on for 89 pages about how atheism was a religion because Websters dictionary said so and you couldn't wrap your head around the concept that it isn't and everyone was just wishing the thread would die but you wouldn't let it? Ha! What were you thinking? Good times man."

Of course I never would because that would be kinda D-baggish of me.

But I should have known better. I've been here long enough to know the drill. Express a difference of political opinion and get descended upon by a pack of hyenas. I wonder how many more members GT would have if that weren't the case. Wonder how much more money Eric would make.

Sorry that your crappy ideology keeps getting torn to shreds.
It's not our fault you can't adequately defend your political positions.
Instead of crying every time someone rejects your position, maybe you can try and have an honest debate on what you perceive as the merits of your position.
This isn't DU were dissent is censored. We welcome your kind of thinking because we can defend ours.
You just don't like the fact that you often lose.

janice6
07-02-2012, 14:23
Hats off to you and the 1st Cav, Doc.



I'm impressed. Many find it hard to "do the right thing".

Ruble Noon
07-02-2012, 14:23
You gonna follow me all around the forum shoving that up my a** now? This here is a different thread.



I'm not that kind of guy.

Cavalry Doc
07-02-2012, 15:02
I'm impressed. Many find it hard to "do the right thing".

It's never too hard to do the right thing. I think I've spoken that sentence at least a thousand times.

Gunhaver
07-02-2012, 15:16
I'm not that kind of guy.

I can't help but notice that you ignored my question. Are people that don't fall lockstep in line with your political ideology not good enough to help support R2BA? Can you just do without us?

Anyone else please feel free to chime in on this too.

Ruble Noon
07-02-2012, 15:23
I can't help but notice that you ignored my question. Are people that don't fall lockstep in line with your political ideology not good enough to help support R2BA? Can you just do without us?

Anyone else please feel free to chime in on this too.

I'm a libertarian so I am pretty tolerant of others. However, supporting government confiscation of one thing and not another is not consistent. If you feel the government has the power to confiscate wealth why then should the government not have the power to confiscate weapons?

ETA. No I don't welcome socialists into our ranks because I know that someday you will want to turn the governments gun in my direction.

Cavalry Doc
07-02-2012, 15:23
I can't help but notice that you ignored my question. Are people that don't fall lockstep in line with your political ideology not good enough to help support R2BA? Can you just do without us?

Anyone else please feel free to chime in on this too.

I welcome support for the second amendment (with my interpretation of course) from anyone, regardless of whether we disagree on other issues.

series1811
07-02-2012, 15:48
There is a certain segment of the population that wants to believe the worst about government in general, and police in particular.

I doubt that segment is going to be mollified by any statements by anyone.

BLACKMAGICK
07-02-2012, 16:07
You gonna follow me all around the forum shoving that up my a** now? This here is a different thread.

For 9 years now I've been a firearms instructor with a lot of liberal friends and I've been an ambassador to the shooting sports to every one of them. I have a standing offer to all my friends and anyone they know to come to the range with me and shoot a free box of ammo just to show them how much fun it can be. I've probably spent several thousand dollars on ammo in that time. I have 12 pistols and 3 rifles for them to choose from and I'd estimate that I'm personally responsible for convincing well over 100 people to go purchase their own handgun and more than half of them have gotten carry permits. I find my method much more effective than standing around here preaching to the choir. Last I checked this was a firearms forum, not an Obamacare haters forum.

So would you have me go back and unravel all that effort? Let every one of them know that the gun owners on Glocktalk don't want their support unless their political leanings all fall right in line with the GOP? All because you can't handle the fact that I have a sick friend and thought maybe ACA wouldn't be such a bad thing for her?

Some of you guys here are exactly what keeps a lot of people from wanting to learn anything about guns because you're exactly what they envision when they think of a gun owner. I guarantee that I've done a lot more to further the Second Amendment that you have but you could maybe catch up with me just by keeping your mouth shut for the next 9 years.

See now, if you stopped providing free ammo just to turn people on to the joys of shooting and sell some of those guns think about how much money you could give your dear, sick woman friend. :upeyes:

Kingarthurhk
07-02-2012, 16:15
No!!!

Fed Five Oh
07-02-2012, 16:41
Congratulations on your hypothetical victory.

But back to the very serious question posed by this thread: if the Constitution were legally and properly amended, following all procedures and protocols to result in the abolishing of the second amendment and then laws were passed to ban ownership of guns, would you obey your oath to the president, constitution, et al and execute a legitimate and lawful order to confiscate guns from otherwise law-abiding citizens?

Seems under your senario that the Oath Keepers would have no choice but to confiscate firearms.

Me personally, the day they amend the Constitution to ban firearms would be my retirement date.

Gunhaver
07-02-2012, 17:12
Sorry that your crappy ideology keeps getting torn to shreds.
It's not our fault you can't adequately defend your political positions.
Instead of crying every time someone rejects your position, maybe you can try and have an honest debate on what you perceive as the merits of your position.
This isn't DU were dissent is censored. We welcome your kind of thinking because we can defend ours.
You just don't like the fact that you often lose.

The funny thing is that it's not really my political position. I'm not all for it, never advocated for it, I even voted in Missouri to exempt Missouri from it because I'm a small business owner and I read about it. Didn't like what I saw. I simply thought that now that it's passed and the SCOTUS has upheld it that I'd look at the bright side and think maybe it would do some good for someone I know. And I haven't read the whole bill so I don't know exactly what's in there but I know I'm not about to let insane fear mongers like Rush, Hannity, O'reily and Beck spoon feed their version to me.

When I dig in my heels and debate hard I stick to what I know. Come on over to the religious forum if you want to play that game with me. I enjoy it. I just don't have the same passion for the ACA issue. Your problem is that I'm not just as rabidly against it as you are. I'm not pissed to the max about it so you just lump me in with the extreme Socialists because that's the extent of your thought process.

I don't choose this particular battle. Deal with it.

RC-RAMIE
07-02-2012, 17:16
The funny thing is that it's not really my political position. I'm not all for it, never advocated for it, I even voted in Missouri to exempt Missouri from it because I'm a small business owner and I read about it. Didn't like what I saw. I simply thought that now that it's passed and the SCOTUS has upheld it that I'd look at the bright side and think maybe it would do some good for someone I know. And I haven't read the whole bill so I don't know exactly what's in there but I know I'm not about to let insane fear mongers like Rush, Hannity, O'reily and Beck spoon feed their version to me.

When I dig in my heels and debate hard I stick to what I know. Come on over to the religious forum if you want to play that game with me. I enjoy it. I just don't have the same passion for the ACA issue. Your problem is that I'm not just as rabidly against it as you are. I'm not pissed to the max about it so you just lump me in with the extreme Socialists because that's the extent of your thought process.

I don't choose this particular battle. Deal with it.

No you are against it so you know it's wrong but are ok with it because somebody you know might benefit from it. That sounds much better.


....

Gunhaver
07-02-2012, 17:20
No you are against it so you know it's wrong but are ok with it because somebody you know might benefit from it. That sounds much better.


....

M'kay smart guy. Whatever you need to tell yourself so it makes sense to you.

Lethaltxn
07-02-2012, 17:25
The funny thing is that it's not really my political position. I'm not all for it, never advocated for it, I even voted in Missouri to exempt Missouri from it because I'm a small business owner and I read about it. Didn't like what I saw. I simply thought that now that it's passed and the SCOTUS has upheld it that I'd look at the bright side and think maybe it would do some good for someone I know. And I haven't read the whole bill so I don't know exactly what's in there but I know I'm not about to let insane fear mongers like Rush, Hannity, O'reily and Beck spoon feed their version to me.

No you just let the DNC spoon feed you.


When I dig in my heels and debate hard I stick to what I know. Come on over to the religious forum if you want to play that game with me.

We're not debating religion here, nor do I want to. You want to come to this forum to debate ideas you have to come armed. We're debating a topic you're clearly ignorant on.


I just don't have the same passion for the ACA issue.


Yet you rabidly try and argue for it? :dunno:


Your problem is that I'm not just as rabidly against it as you are.

It's not my problem.


I'm not pissed to the max about it so you just lump me in with the extreme Socialists because that's the extent of your thought process.

Actually you did that yourself by advocating the forceful theft of other's property to placate your own desires.


I don't choose this particular battle. Deal with it.

But you did, and lost.

Gunhaver
07-02-2012, 17:30
No you just let the DNC spoon feed you.



We're not debating religion here, nor do I want to. You want to come to this forum to debate ideas you have to come armed. We're debating a topic you're clearly ignorant on.



Yet you rabidly try and argue for it? :dunno:



It's not my problem.



Actually you did that yourself by advocating the forceful theft of other's property to placate your own desires.



But you did, and lost.

Ok fine. You win hands down. That's how much I GAF. :wavey:

Lethaltxn
07-02-2012, 17:35
Ok fine. You win hands down. That's how much I GAF. :wavey:

Enough that you felt you needed to post.
You can care or not, just don't act as if the world's against you if you lose the argument.

Gunhaver
07-02-2012, 17:40
Enough that you felt you needed to post.
You can care or not, just don't act as if the world's against you if you lose the argument.

No really, I want you to have this victory. You earned it.

chickenwing
07-02-2012, 18:31
Seems under your senario that the Oath Keepers would have no choice but to confiscate firearms.

Me personally, the day they amend the Constitution to ban firearms would be my retirement date.

Time to move then? Some nice places in South America if you have the funds.



Good thing all my guns were lost in a boating accident.

jakebrake
07-02-2012, 18:37
Interesting comments section.

how bout it? omar's remarks were as popular as richard nixon, boiled turnips, or 1965 ramblers.

chickenwing
07-02-2012, 18:38
No really, I want you to have this victory. You earned it.

I'm interested in a honest answer myself, sorry to butt in.



Why is it OK to you for the government to confiscate property, like money, to pay for someone's health. But not it's not OK for the government to take guns? Which is property as well.

beforeobamabans
07-02-2012, 18:55
Do Marxists vote republican about 75% of the time and talk people into buying guns? You guys sure have fun with your labels. So you're cool with me popping up in any old thread and saying, "Hey Doc, remember that time you went on for 89 pages about how atheism was a religion because Websters dictionary said so and you couldn't wrap your head around the concept that it isn't and everyone was just wishing the thread would die but you wouldn't let it? Ha! What were you thinking? Good times man."

Of course I never would because that would be kinda D-baggish of me.

But I should have known better. I've been here long enough to know the drill. Express a difference of political opinion and get descended upon by a pack of hyenas. I wonder how many more members GT would have if that weren't the case. Wonder how much more money Eric would make.

Actually, having a somewhat free-wheelin' PI forum keeps a lot of garbage out of the rest of the forums. While I don't like a lot of the personal invective, people get emotionial about politics because it is important to them. I applaud GT for allowing PI to go as far as it does with a minimum of policing. The infractions that are handed down are usually well deserved. So, if a little spirited debate chafes your sensitive parts, it's real easy to skip it.