The Writer in Black

The Writer in Black

Saturday, September 20, 2014

Nobody wants to take your guns

Moved to https://thewriterinblack.com/2017/05/17/nobody-wants-to-take-your-guns-2/ Look there for latest updates.

Whenever I, or others, object to "registration" or bans on transfers, or other forms of "gun control" and firearms restrictions as steps toward an eventual complete prohibition and the confiscation that such would necessarily entail, we get told we're paranoid and "nobody wants to take your guns."

Well, perhaps we should consider these "nobodies":

"A gun-control movement worthy of the name would insist that President Clinton move beyond his proposals for controls ... and immediately call on Congress to pass far-reaching industry regulation like the Firearms Safety and Consumer Protection Act ... [which] would give the Treasury Department health and safety authority over the gun industry, and any rational regulator with that authority would ban handguns." Josh Sugarmann (executive director of the Violence Policy Center)

"My view of guns is simple. I hate guns and I cannot imagine why anyone would want to own one. If I had my way, guns for sport would be registered, and all other guns would be banned." Deborah Prothrow-Stith (Dean of Harvard School of Public Health)

"I don't care if you want to hunt, I don't care if you think it's your right. I say 'Sorry.' it's 1999. We have had enough as a nation. You are not allowed to own a gun, and if you do own a gun I think you should go to prison." Rosie O'Donnell (At about the time she said this, Rosie engaged the services of a bodyguard who applied for a gun permit.)

Confiscation could be an option. Mandatory sale to the state could be an option. Permitting could be an option — keep your gun but permit it.” Andrew Cuomo

"I do not believe in people owning guns. Guns should be owned only by [the] police and military. I am going to do everything I can to disarm this state." Michael Dukakis

"If someone is so fearful that they are going to start using their weapons to protect their rights, it makes me very nervous that these people have weapons at all." U.S. Rep. Henry Waxman

"In fact, the assault weapons ban will have no significant effect either on the crime rate or on personal security. Nonetheless, it is a good idea ... Passing a law like the assault weapons ban is a symbolic - purely symbolic - move in that direction. Its only real justification is not to reduce crime but to desensitize the public to the regulation of weapons in preparation for their ultimate confiscation." Charles Krauthammer, columnist, 4/5/96 Washington Post

"Ban the damn things. Ban them all. You want protection? Get a dog." Molly Ivins, columnist, 7/19/94

"[To get a] permit to own a firearm, that person should undergo an exhaustive criminal background check. In addition, an applicant should give up his right to privacy and submit his medical records for review to see if the person has ever had a problem with alcohol, drugs or mental illness . . . The Constitution doesn't count!" John Silber, former chancellor of Boston University and candidate for Governor of Massachusetts. Speech before the Quequechan Club of Fall River, MA. August 16, 1990

"I think you have to do it a step at a time and I think that is what the NRA is most concerned about. Is that it will happen one very small step at a time so that by the time, um, people have woken up, quote, to what's happened, it's gone farther than what they feel the consensus of American citizens would be. But it does have to go one step at a time and the banning of semiassault military weapons that are military weapons, not household weapons, is the first step." Mayor Barbara Fass, Stockton, CA

"Handguns should be outlawed. Our organization will probably take this stand in time but we are not anxious to rouse the opposition before we get the other legislation passed." Elliot Corbett, Secretary, National Council For A Responsible Firearms Policy (interview appeared in the Washington Evening Star on September 19, 1969)

"Banning guns addresses a fundamental right of all Americans to feel safe." Senator Diane Feinstein, 1993

"If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an outright ban, picking up every one of them... 'Mr. and Mrs. America, turn 'em all in, I would have done it. I could not do that. The votes weren't here." U.S. Senator Diane Feinstein (D-CA) CBS-TV's "60 Minutes," 2/5/95

"Banning guns is an idea whose time has come." U.S. Senator Joseph Biden, 11/18/93, Associated Press interview

"Yes, I'm for an outright ban (on handguns)." Pete Shields, Chairman emeritus, Handgun Control, Inc., during a 60 Minutes interview.

"I am one who believes that as a first step, the United States should move expeditiously to disarm the civilian population, other than police and security officers, of all handguns, pistols, and revolvers... No one should have the right to anonymous ownership or use of a gun." Professor Dean Morris, Director of Law Enforcement Assistance Administration, stated to the U.S. Congress

"I feel very strongly about it [the Brady Bill]. I think - I also associate myself with the other remarks of the Attorney General. I think it's the beginning. It's not the end of the process by any means." William J. Clinton, 8/11/93

"The Brady Bill is the minimum step Congress should take...we need much stricter gun control, and eventually should bar the ownership of handguns, except in a few cases." U.S. Representative William Clay, quoted in the St. Louis Post Dispatch on May 6, 1991.

"I don't believe gun owners have rights." Sarah Brady, Hearst Newspapers Special Report "Handguns in America", October 1997

"We must get rid of all the guns." Sarah Brady, speaking on behalf of HCI with Sheriff Jay Printz & others on "The Phil Donahue Show" September 1994

"The House passage of our bill is a victory for this country! Common sense wins out. I'm just so thrilled and excited. The sale of guns must stop. Halfway measures are not enough." Sarah Brady 7/1/88

"I don't care about crime, I just want to get the guns." Senator Howard Metzenbaum, 1994

"We're here to tell the NRA their nightmare is true..." U.S. Representative Charles Schumer, quoted on NBC, 11/30/93

"My bill ... establishes a 6-month grace period for the turning in of all handguns." U.S. Representative Major Owens, Congressional Record, 11/10/93

"I'm convinced that we have to have federal legislation to build on. We're going to have to take one step at a time, and the first step is necessarily — given the political realities — going to be very modest. Of course, it's true that politicians will then go home and say, 'This is a great law. The problem is solved.' And it's also true that such statements will tend to defuse the gun-control issue for a time. So then we'll have to strengthen that law, and then again to strengthen that law, and maybe again and again. Right now, though, we'd be satisfied not with half a loaf but with a slice. Our ultimate goal — total control of handguns in the United States — is going to take time. My estimate is from seven to ten years. The problem is to slow down the increasing number of handguns sold in this country. The second problem is to get them all registered. And the final problem is to make the possession of all handguns and all handgun ammunition — except for the military, policemen, licensed security guards, licensed sporting clubs, and licensed gun collectors — totally illegal." Nelson T. Shields of Hangun Control, Inc. as quoted in `New Yorker' magazine July 26, 1976. Page 53f

"Our goal is to not allow anybody to buy a handgun. In the meantime, we think there ought to be strict licensing and regulation. Ultimately, that may mean it would require court approval to buy a handgun." President of the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence Michael K. Beard, Washington Times 12/6/93 p.A1

"Waiting periods are only a step. Registration is only a step. The prohibition of private firearms is the goal." U.S. Attorney General Janet Reno, December 1993

"The sale, manufacture, and possession of handguns ought to be banned...We do not believe the 2nd Amendment guarantees an individual the right to keep them." The Washington Post - "Legal Guns Kill Too" - November 5, 1999

"There is no reason for anyone in the country, for anyone except a police officer or a military person, to buy, to own, to have, to use, a handgun. The only way to control handgun use in this country is to prohibit the guns. And the only way to do that is to Change the Constitution." USA Today - Michael Gartner - Former president of NBC News - "Glut of Guns: What Can We Do About Them?" - January 16, 1992

"I would personally just say to those who are listening, maybe you want to turn in your guns," Representative Sheila Jackson Lee, 2012

" 4. Any person who, prior to the effective date of this law, was legally in possession of an assault weapon or large capacity magazine shall have ninety days from such effective date to do any of the following without being subject to prosecution :
             (1) Remove the assault weapon or large capacity magazine from the state of Missouri;
             (2) Render the assault weapon permanently inoperable; or
             (3) Surrender the assault weapon or large capacity magazine to the appropriate law enforcement agency for destruction, subject to specific agency regulations." Legislation introduced in Missouri.2013

And you can repeat the exact same thing for Minnesota

"Since assault weapons are not a major contributor to US gun homicide and the existing stock of guns is large, an assault weapon ban is unlikely to have an impact on gun violence. If coupled with a gun buyback and no exemptions then it could be effective." NIJ Memo on a new "Assault Weapon" Ban. 2013

"The sheriff of the county may, no more than once per year, conduct an inspection to ensure compliance with this subsection" (Warrantless searches by law enforcement?) Washington State Senate Bill 5737 (2013)

“the state of Iowa should take semi-automatic weapons away from Iowans who have legally purchased them prior to any ban that is enacted if they don’t give their weapons up in a buy-back program.  Even if you have them, I think we need to start taking them,” Iowa state Rep. Dan Muhlbauer (D-Manilla) 2013

California Senate Bill 374 (Steinberg 2013) would expand the definition of “Assault Weapons” to include ALL semi-auto rifles (including rimfire calibers) that accept a detachable magazine.

SB374 would ban on the sale and possession of ALL Semi-Auto rifles and require registration to retain legal possession in the future. California Senate Bill 47 (Yee 2013) would expand the definition of “Assault Weapons” to include rifles that have been designed/sold and or equipped to use the “bullet button” or similar device.

SB47 would ban on the sale and possession of ALL those Semi-Auto rifles and require registration to retain legal possession in the future.

California Assembly Bill 174 (Bonta 2013) would ban the possession of any firearms that were “grandfathered “ for possession if registered in previous “Assault Weapons” gun control schemes. 

Californians that trusted the State of California and registered their firearms will be required to surrender the firearms to the Government or face arrest. Passage of AB174 would make SB374/SB47 (above) into confiscation mandates.

California Senate Bill 396 (Hancock 2013) would ban the possession of any magazine with a capacity to accept more than 10 cartridges. ALL currently grandfathered “high-cap” magazines would become ILLEGAL to possess and the owners subject to arrest and the magazines confiscated. ("High-cap" means a capacity that has been standard, that the firearms were designed for, since the 40's--AK pattern rifles--or 60's--AR pattern rifles.)

We want everything on the table. This is a moment of opportunity. There’s no question about it...We’re on a roll now, and I think we’ve got to take the–you know, we’re gonna push as hard as we can and as far as we can.” Illinois Rep Jan Schakowsky says assault rifle ban just the beginning, ‘moment of opportunity’ and seeks to ban handguns (2013).

"People who own guns are essentially a sickness in our souls who must be cleansed." Colorado Senator (Majority Leader) John Morse. 2013 (Cleansed?  "Final Solution" anyone?)

"We needed a bill that was going to confiscate, confiscate, confiscate.”  Discussion among Senator Loretta Weinberg (D37), Senator Sandra Cunningham (D31), Senator Linda Greenstein (D14) of New Jersey's State Legislature, May 9, 2013

“No one in this country should have guns.” Superior Court Judge, Robert C. Brunetti, Bristol, CT. September, 2013

Proposed Missouri Bill to ban "assault weapons": 4. Any person who, prior to the effective date of this law, was legally in possession of an assault weapon or large capacity magazine shall have ninety days from such effective date to do any of the following without being subject to prosecution:
(1) Remove the assault weapon or large capacity magazine from the state of Missouri;
(2) Render the assault weapon permanently inoperable; or
(3) Surrender the assault weapon or large capacity magazine to the appropriate law enforcement agency for destruction, subject to specific agency regulations.

New York sends out Confiscation letters.

“It is extremely important that individuals in the state of California do not own assault weapons. I mean that is just so crystal clear, there is no debate, no discussion,” Leland Yee, California State Senator.

Shannon Watts (head of "Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense"): "@MikeBloomberg and I want guns gone. Period. It doesn't matter what it takes." (Twitter, 2014).

"Upon review of all the parties’ evidence, the court seriously doubts that the banned assault long guns are commonly possessed for lawful purposes, particularly self-defense in the home, which is at the core of the Second Amendment right, and is inclined to find the weapons fall outside Second Amendment protection as dangerous and unusual." U.S. District Judge Catherine C. Blake. (The "assault weapons" being described are semi-automatic weapons--meaning one shot fired per pull of the trigger--of fairly modest power, near the low end of center fire rifles.)  As for the claim that said weapons are not particularly useful for home defense.  I address that here. "

2. No person, corporation or other entity in the state of Missouri may manufacture, import, possess, purchase, sell, or transfer any assault weapon or large capacity magazine." Bill introduced in Missouri House.

NJ.com editorial boards advocates for "mandatory gun buybacks". http://www.nj.com/opinion/index.ssf/2014/09/nj_gun_buyback_programs.html "So do all the voluntary gun buybacks you want. But until they are mandatory, and our society can see past its hysteria over "gun confiscation," don't expect it to make much difference."

"Gun Surrender" without the anonymous provision:
“We’ll take that weapon into safekeeping as a matter of practice. It’s pretty easy,” he said of the surrender process. “We are working to find ways in which we can make it easier for people to turn in weapons and firearms.”
Callers will provide their name, telephone number and address, and the reason for surrender. Once the firearm has been checked to see if it was involved in a crime police will mark it for destruction.
 (So, basically, people with illegal guns, or guns used in crime, will stay away in droves.  The only purpose of such a provision is to take legally owned guns from people.)

Another shooting in another "gun-free zone" (Florida requires guns on college campuses to be locked up and cannot be carried) leads to calls for gun prohibition:
"I'm talking about flat-out banning the possession of handguns and assault rifles by individual citizens. I'm talking about repealing or amending the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution."

Read more here: http://www.thenewstribune.com/2014/09/22/3393346/tacoma-gun-surrender-plan-wont.html?sp=%2F99%2F289%2F&ihp=1#storylink=cpy

Another one who clings to the "The Second only applies to government 'militias'" creed (never mind that the first time that came up was in the Miller case in 1939 and the Supreme Court's decision, despite the government arguing their case unchallenged, was only on the basis of whether the weapon had a militia use, not whether the deceased Miller (why his side wasn't even presented) had been a member of a proper militia and so, given the Supreme Court's returning to the original, plain meaning of the Second in Heller and McDonald decisions sees only one possibility (recognizing the Right to Keep and Bear Arms is apparently not on the table):
"Repeal the stupid Second Amendment." Article in Wisconsin Gazette.
Note:  Normally I reserve this page for explicit calls for gun confiscation and the author of this article doesn't explicitly call for such.  But I figure a complete repeal of the 2nd could really only be for one purpose.  So I'll allow this one.  I'm not, however, going to include every such call for repeal.  Let this one stand for the idea.  I'll unbend occasionally when something is egregious enough, but this page is for calls for actual confiscation.

"An advisory panel charged with looking at public safety in the wake of the deadly Newtown school shooting agreed Friday to include in its final report a recommendation to ban the sale and possession of any gun that can fire more than 10 rounds without reloading." (Banning possession means you can't have it.  I.e. they've taken it whether directly or by forcing you to get rid of it yourself.)

"Let’s say that one again: A gun-free society." From an article in The Washington Post.

"In other words, yes, we really do want to take your guns." Josh Marshall at Talking Points Memo.

"I urge President Obama to ban firearm possession in America. He is the president of the United States. He can change the country. He can do it today. I believe in him."  Opinion piece in Democrat & Chronicle, a Gannet Company (Gannet publishes a number of "mainstream" newspapers).  This individual appears to be a bit weak on how lawmaking works in this country but the sentiment is there.

“I don’t know enough details to tell you how we would do it or how it would work, but certainly the Australia example is worth looking at,” Clinton said at a New Hampshire town hall on Friday. ("Australian example" is confiscation--they may pay what the government thinks is a "fair" amount, for it but the end result is that the gun is gone.)

Some older ones recently brought to my attention:
Guns are a virus that must be eradicated.”—Dr. Katherine Christoffel, pediatrician, in American Medical News, January 3, 1994.  In the 1990s Dr. Christoffel was the leader of the now-defunct HELP Network, a Chicago-based association of major medical organizations and grant seekers advancing gun control in the medical media.  The name HELP was an acronym for Handgun Epidemic Lowering Plan.

“Data on [assault weapons’] risks are not needed, because they have no redeeming social value.—Jerome Kassirer, M.D., former editor, New England Journal of Medicine, writing in vol. 326, no. 17, page 1161 (April 23, 1992).

"Certain kinds of weapons, like the slightly modified combat rifles used in California, and certain kinds of ammunition, must be outlawed for civilian ownership. It is possible to define those guns in a clear and effective way and, yes, it would require Americans who own those kinds of weapons to give them up for the good of their fellow citizens." New York Times editorial
(Emphasis added in the above).

"Screw The NRA! It’s Time To REPEAL The Second Amendment Once And For All" This one's a little harder to accept into this list.  In the article they author claims not supporting summarily banning all firearms, but really, banning is the only justification for a repeal of the 2nd.  Look, may think it's unnecessary but the 2nd is there.  Even if you don't care for it, it does no harm unless you're planning on banning.  Therefore any call for a repeal of the 2nd Amendment is a call for prohibition and to "take your guns".  And saying that it's not all the guns does not justify it.

"We should, that is, seek to 'control' access to them and their use. But even that’s not going far enough. We should get rid of them, that is, ban them. Guns create too many problems, promote too much fear, and lead to too many deaths to not consider banning them. Perhaps they were necessary at some point in our history, but let’s declare that that time has run its course." Salon

"As a person of principle let me be very clear to any "conservatives" who troll the Kos for proof that liberals want to take away thier guns.  Here you go conservatives:  We liberals really do want to take away your guns and never let you have them back." They go into a lot of "ifs" after that, but they ring a little hollow after this bold statement.

"Maryland Attorney General Brian Frosh ... also provided his opinion of the Second Amendment, stating that 'we should ban guns altogether, period.'" In a hidden camera interview.


"Needed: Domestic Disarmament, Not 'Gun Control' That headline pretty much says it all.

an guns. All guns. Get rid of guns in homes, and on the streets, and, as much as possible, on police. Not just because of San Bernardino, or whichever mass shooting may pop up next, but also not not because of those. Don’t sort the population into those who might do something evil or foolish or self-destructive with a gun and those who surely will not. As if this could be known—as if it could be assessed without massively violating civil liberties and stigmatizing the mentally ill. Ban guns! Not just gun violence. Not just certain guns. Not just already-technically-illegal guns. All of them. "  Article in The New Republic


"What has to go?
All magazine fed, self-loading firearms.
Yes, that means handguns too.
Yes, that includes your 4 shot Remington hunting rifle.
Yes, that includes rigid controls on police firearms.

Your 5 shot revolver can go home with you officer, your 17 shot handgun stays inside the armory of the police station.  Armory, not your locker.  Signed-in, signed-out, via proximity card reader, with real-time computer controls at the State and Federal levels." Daily Kos

"We could use a President who was, like, 'OK. Everybody turn in all your guns tomorrow by 5 p.m. After that, if I catch you with a gun then I'm sending SEAL Team Six to your house with a recent Facebook picture of you and those tanks that shoot fire that we haven't used since Waco -- Ummm -- I mean since World War II.'" CNN Commentator



"Bans on the manufacture and sale of all semiautomatic and other military-style guns and government offers to buy back any rifle or pistol in circulation. It won’t solve the problem, but Australia proved that such programs can help reduce gun deaths." NY Times writer Thomas L. Friedman (Anyone who invokes Australia is calling for confiscation.)

"179 (a) Notwithstanding Code Sections 16-11-115 and Code Section 16-11-116, any person
180 who possesses any assault weapon or large capacity magazine on July 1, 2016, shall have
1801until October 31, 2016, to accomplish any of the following actions without any prosecution
182 under the law:
183 (1) Modify such assault weapon or large capacity magazine to render it permanently
184 inoperable or such that it is no longer an assault weapon or large capacity magazine; or
185 (2) Surrender such assault weapon or large capacity magazine to the Georgia Bureau of
186 Investigation for destruction pursuant to this part.
187 (b) Notwithstanding Code Section 16-11-115 and Code Section 16-11-116, any person
188 who relocates his or her residence to this state and who possesses an assault weapon or
189 large capacity magazine or who comes to possess such assault weapon or large capacity
190 magazine through probate shall, within 90 days of establishing such residency or the
191 closing of such probate, modify such assault weapon or large capacity magazine to render
192 it permanently inoperable or such that it is no longer an assault weapon or large capacity
193 magazine or surrender such assault weapon or large capacity magazine to the Georgia
194 Bureau of Investigation for destruction pursuant to this part"

"Given that even micro gun control measures will be effectively blocked by the NRA and its allies, and that promoting mini measures as potentially effective is misleading, progressives may as well go for the big enchilada: Call for domestic disarmament."
Amitai EtzioniProfessor of international relations, George Washington University

"I really don’t personally think anyone should have a gun," Bonnie Schaefer, DNC Platform Committee member.

"We need to say loud and clear: The Second Amendment must be repealed." At least the "Constitutional Law professor" David S. Cohen acknowledges that you actually have to repeal the Amendment to take our guns. (2/3 of the House, 2/3 of the Senate and 3/4 of State legislatures.  Good luck with that.)

“If I could I would take all the guns in America, put them on big barges, and go dump them in the ocean,” says Walker in the above video from the Oregonian. “Nobody would have a gun. Not police, not security, not anybody. We should eliminate all of them." Multnomah County Circuit (Oregon) Judge Kenneth Walker

Illinois Senate Bill 1291
 “Creates the Lethal Violence Order of Protection Act. Provides that a petitioner may request an emergency lethal violence order of protection by filing an affidavit or verified pleading alleging that the respondent poses an immediate and present danger of causing personal injury to himself, herself, or another by having in his or her custody or control, owning, purchasing, possessing, or receiving a firearm. Provides that the petition shall also describe the type, and location of any firearm or firearms presently believed by the petitioner to be possessed or controlled by the respondent.
...
Provides that if the court issues the order the respondent must: (1) refrain from having in his or her custody or control, owning, purchasing, possessing, or receiving additional firearms for the duration of the order; and (2) turn over to the local law enforcement agency any firearm, Firearm Owner’s Identification Card, or concealed carry license in his or her possession.” So if a police officer or other petitioner simply claims they believe the individual is a threat to self or others they have to give their firearms to law enforcement.  Can't give them to somebody to hold for them until the matter is resolved with due process but must give them up to the police.  Look, ever mind the 2nd Amendment, remember the Fifth? "Nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law"? That should not be a difficult concept.

“The first thing to do is stop manufacturing and selling them, and the second thing to do is have a very lucrative buyback-and-confiscation program,” Dan Wolf, a Harwich-based Democrat who served three terms with the Massachusetts Legislature, said at a Grandmothers Against Gun Violence meeting.
 
"But nobody wants to take our guns?"

57 comments:

  1. consider adding this info about how Obama voted to your 'no guns' list.

    http://obamagun.blogspot.com/2008/08/ban-and-confiscate-rifles-and-shotguns.html

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Unfortunately, the description of the bill at the Obamagun blog is not quite accurate. It says any semiautomatic with greater than five rounds capacity. That is inaccurate. A semiautomatic rifle, to be banned, must have the ability to accept a detachable magazine and have one or more of the other "usual suspect" features.

      It's semiautomatic _shotguns_ with more than 5 rounds capacity that would have been banned.

      It's still a bad bill, don't get me wrong, but it's not quite as presented. And it's a little harder to distil a "they _do_ want to take your guns" out of the actual bill. But it's Illinois. Of _course_ they want to take your guns. That's what they do.

      Delete
    2. http://www.tallahassee.com/story/opinion/columnists/ensley/2014/11/22/stop-insanity-ban-guns/19426029/

      Delete
  2. How about this excerpt from an oral argument from the Clinton-Gore years? You can find citations for this all over the net.

    The U.S. government argues in federal court (U.S. v. Emerson information page) that there is absolutely no right of an individual to own firearms.

    Judge Garwood: "You are saying that the Second Amendment is consistent with a position that you can take guns away from the public? You can restrict ownership of rifles, pistols and shotguns from all people? Is that the position of the United States?"

    Meteja (attorney for the government): "Yes"

    Garwood: "Is it the position of the United States that persons who are not in the National Guard are afforded no protections under the Second Amendment?"

    Meteja: "Exactly."

    Meteja then said that even membership in the National Guard isn't enough to protect the private ownership of a firearm. It wouldn't protect the guns owned at the home of someone in the National Guard.

    Garwood: "Membership in the National Guard isn't enough? What else is needed?"

    Meteja: "The weapon in question must be used IN the National Guard."

    (Excerpt of oral arguments in U.S. v. Emerson, 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, June 13, 2000)

    ReplyDelete
  3. Here's one that probably should go on your list:

    "We're coming for your guns. And someday, we'll take them."


    http://www.tallahassee.com/story/opinion/columnists/ensley/2014/11/22/stop-insanity-ban-guns/19426029/

    ReplyDelete
  4. Here's another one that maybe should go on your list:

    "Time is overdue to repeal the Second Amendment"

    http://www.wisconsingazette.com/opinion/time-is-overdue-to-repeal-the-second-amendmentr.html

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Added, thanks. While the author of the piece doesn't specifically talk about gun confiscation there really is very little other reason for a complete repeal of the 2nd. And, so I felt it was enough to add.

      Delete
  5. To be fair, the comment by Mr. Krauthammer is his description of the AWB, not his own belief about it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I caught that one too. That one shouldn't be on the list.

      Delete
    2. I've now found and added a link to the original article. Sorry but it very much does look like it's endorsing the idea.

      So until someone can show me that the original article doesn't mean exactly what it seems to mean, it stays.

      Delete
  6. Another quote from Pete Shields (founder of HCI) -- found it online here: http://www.hkweaponsystems.com/cgi-bin/quote.pl?pete_shields and if you have a New Yorker subscription I'd assume you can get it here: http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/1976/07/26/handguns

    "I'm convinced that we have to have federal legislation to build on. We're going to have to take one step at a time, and the first step is necessarily — given the political realities — going to be very modest. Of course, it's true that politicians will then go home and say, 'This is a great law. The problem is solved.' And it's also true that such statements will tend to defuse the gun-control issue for a time. So then we'll have to strengthen that law, and then again to strengthen that law, and maybe again and again. Right now, though, we'd be satisfied not with half a loaf but with a slice. Our ultimate goal — total control of handguns in the United States — is going to take time. My estimate is from seven to ten years. The problem is to slow down the increasing number of handguns sold in this country. The second problem is to get them all registered. And the final problem is to make the possession of all handguns and all handgun ammunition — except for the military, policemen, licensed security guards, licensed sporting clubs, and licensed gun collectors — totally illegal."

    -Pete Shields, Chairman and founder, Handgun Control Inc., "A Reporter At Large: Handguns," The New Yorker, July 26, 1976, 57-58

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks. This is a longer version of a quote I already have. Updated with this longer quote.

      Delete
  7. How about this one?

    http://www.pennlive.com/opinion/2015/03/something_by_jamar_about_guns.html

    ReplyDelete
  8. how about this one?

    http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/07/28/alan-dershowitz-2nd-amendment-an-absurd-thing-in-our-constitution/

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Trying to find an original source for that. A lot of people will dismiss Breitbart and claim that he was misquoted or quoted out of context (at least when they want to claim "Nobody wants to take your guns").

      Thanks for the heads up.

      Delete
  9. The oldes comments were in 1976. What happened then that caused guns to become independently motivated to do harm, thus making them liable for confiscation?

    ReplyDelete
  10. Here's a new one by Josh Marshall:

    "In other words, yes, we really do want to take your guns. Maybe not all of them. But a lot of them."

    http://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/thinking-beyond-the-moment

    ReplyDelete
  11. Another one, this time the new California voter initiative:

    http://news.yahoo.com/top-california-official-propose-gun-control-initiative-070214538.html

    The real problem with this one is this element:

    >Next, it would revoke the grandfather status on detachable firearms magazines that were in the state prior to California’s adoption of a 2000 ban on what were termed large capacity magazines. Efforts to do the same in cities such as Los Angeles and Sunnyvale have met with both resistance and litigation.

    THIS is why a lot of people have chosen not to register their things because, even if they "grandfathered" in, doesn't mean they are safe. Who's to say that you won't be going after them at a later time?

    ReplyDelete
  12. Here's another one, although not from a tremendously visible public figure, she is an educator and thus a shaper of young minds:

    http://www.democratandchronicle.com/story/opinion/guest-column/2015/10/09/obamas-legacy-guns-ban/73682284/

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Already got that one, but thank you for continuing to look out for examples.

      Delete
  13. A document complementary to this blog post:

    https://docs.google.com/document/d/1mBrxjLcuygRlG9Tgdw2CiHtV9g1kgUwZGRnieYBpwSo/edit?usp=sharing

    ReplyDelete
  14. Thanks for the post. People who are really concerned about their safety and the safety of their loved ones. They may join any Firearms safety training classes and get training how to use a gun for their safety. The militant activities that is raising day by day in the European countries and the emergence of ISIS has forced people to arm themselves.

    ReplyDelete
  15. “Guns are a virus that must be eradicated.”—Dr. Katherine Christoffel, pediatrician, in American Medical News, January 3, 1994. In the 1990s Dr. Christoffel was the leader of the now-defunct HELP Network, a Chicago-based association of major medical organizations and grant seekers advancing gun control in the medical media. The name HELP was an acronym for Handgun Epidemic Lowering Plan.

    http://drgo.us/?p=266

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. How about this?

      http://legis.wisconsin.gov/assembly/78/subeck/news/press-releases/representative-lisa-subeck-circulates-bill-banning-semiautomatic-weapons/

      Delete
    2. Also covered in TTAG http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2015/11/robert-farago/gun-safety-advocates-ill-tell-you-what-they-want-what-they-really-really-want/

      Delete
  16. A few more:

    http://www.dailykos.com/stories/2012/3/24/1077374/-Yes-conservatives-we-want-to-take-away-your-guns

    http://www.salon.com/2015/12/04/the_second_amendment_must_go_we_ban_lawn_darts_its_time_to_ban_guns/?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=socialflow

    ReplyDelete
  17. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  18. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  19. So, this one is from a video from Project Veritas, and I don't know, it might be kind of iffy, 'cause the "undercover reporter" agreed to keep it off the record, but here it is on the record.

    But listen to the comments said by Maryland Deputy Attorney General Thiruvendran Vignarajah.

    http://www.projectveritas.com/posts/news/maryland-attorney-general%E2%80%99s-office-sex-guns-and-egregious-ethical-violations

    Gun control comments start at 1:45. He calls for a ban on private gun ownership.

    ReplyDelete
  20. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  21. I have to ask. You are pretty good on siting where the quote was taken from but on former Vermont State Senator Mary Ann Carlson you seem to have none. I am in a lively debate and can not source you in it if you too do not have the source. In fact "Snopes" the 80% fact checkers claim that this is construed version of her verbiage. If you would let me know where your sourced I would be forever thankful.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. When I started this, I "seeded" it with other lists that existed at the time. The sourcing of those was somewhat mixed. Another problem you run into is that an original source will delete or sanitize something, suddenly rendering everything else quoting it as "unsubstantiated". I can't tell which of those happened here at this point.

      It should be noted that, Vermont being the state it was, whatever specific comments she actually made, and the legislation she introduced, led to her being defeated in reelection.

      Delete
  22. I think this is a new one.

    http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/01/07/president-obama-isn-t-taking-people-s-guns-but-maybe-he-should.html

    ReplyDelete
  23. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/06/opinion/up-with-extremism.html?smid=tw-share&_r=1

    "Bans on the manufacture and sale of all semiautomatic and other military-style guns and government offers to buy back any rifle or pistol in circulation. It won’t solve the problem, but Australia proved that such programs can help reduce gun deaths."

    ReplyDelete
  24. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  25. sir:

    why don't you come and get them, instead of seal team six? pussy.

    john jay
    milton freewater, oregon

    ReplyDelete
  26. Nice blog actually. Those who wants to carry amazing and interesting guns with proper licensing must follow the rules and take help from the MA Gun License to have guns for safety and security.

    ReplyDelete
  27. But it's true. Nobody wants to take our guns. Politicians want to send other people on that mission, thinking (correctly) it would be extremely dangerous. I'm pretty sure the cops would prefer not to take that particular task even if the law required it.

    Sorry, I need to vent snark today.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Should the quote by Charles Krauthammer be removed? If your list is of quotes of people who would support such, his quote ought to go, as he is a conservative who is NOT advocating for that position. In fact, he is advocating, in the article from which that quote is drawn, for your exact point -- that confiscation is the ultimate goal.

    ReplyDelete
  29. The common theme here is that a large number of people of influence, many of whom live with heavily armed security, are perfectly willing to use lethal force to disarm the American public.
    Clear enough, lets us know where they're coming from and in my opinion defines the rules of engagement quite specifically.
    Shortly after Pearl Harbor Admiral Yamamoto was asked about a possible invasion of continental United States. Having attended American university he said that there would be a rifle behind every blade of grass. How do you think our lords and masters are going to feel when all those rifles are turned on them.

    ReplyDelete
  30. More fodder for the list:

    http://freebeacon.com/politics/feingold-hillary-might-issue-executive-order-guns/

    TL;DR: In a fundraiser held by WI senator Feingold, he talks about Hillary possibly issuing an Executive Order on guns. Haven't listened to the included video due to time constraints, however, but what's quoted in the article doesn't look promising from a liberty standpoint.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That should read former WI senator, running again for a Senate seat. SOrry.

      Delete
  31. It would be more feasible if add a best air rifle best air riflefor the accurate target, it's a good gun for self-defense and hunting.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Hi Dear,

    I really prefer your blog..! This blog are very useful for me and other. So I see it every day.

    Our wide range of home defense guns for sale includes shotguns, handguns, and rifles. Call us 214-307-2626 to buy concealed home defense guns.

    Visit Now - https://www.concealedarmsandhomedefense.com

    ReplyDelete
  33. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  34. This is a really good post wish more people would read this, you offer some really good suggestions on Louisiana Gun PermitThanks for sharing!

    ReplyDelete