Not All Anti-Gunners Willing to Wait for Slippery Slope

[priell3]

To hear most proponents of "gun control" tell it, those of us who warn that the anti-gun agenda's endpoint is a total ban of private gun ownership are "paranoid" to believe such a thing. President Obama has himself made this claim:

"Part of the challenge we confront is that even the slightest hint of some sensible, responsible legislation in this area fans this notion that somehow, 'Here it comes, everybody's guns are going to be taken away,'" Obama said.

Of course Obama's idea of "sensible, responsible legislation" includes an outright ban of the most popular centerfire rifles in the country, mandating the inclusion of "smart gun" technology (just don't even get me started) in semi-automatic handguns, banning private sales of guns, etc. Beyond that, though, every new restrictive gun law enacted becomes the beachhead from which the next infringement on that which shall not be infringed is launched--the proverbial "slippery slope" in action.

For some gun ban zealots, though, the slippery slope simply cannot be counted upon to act quickly enough--they want their gun bans now. Gerald Ensley, writing for the Tallahassee Democrat, is just such a zealot, as he makes clear in his "Stop the insanity: Ban guns":

I'm not talking about gun control. I'm not talking about waiting periods and background checks.

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.

We've seen this before, and I actually believe that these people deserve more respect than those who work to hide their goal of an outright, total gun ban behind a facade of seeking "moderate," "modest" restrictions on gun ownership. At least the open gun ban jihadists don't try to hide their searing hatred of our means to defend our lives and liberty.

http://jpfo.org/articles-assd04/anti...pery-slope.htm

[sprrdhawk44]

Fuck Obama. No, seriously, fuck that worthless piece of shit.

[drh 686]

Who do these anti-gun butt heads think is going to protect them from the people if they ban guns? The police, I think not.

[pennlineman]

Who do these anti-gun butt heads think is going to protect them from the people if they ban guns? The police, I think not.

In the end, themselves. They'll never achieve their goals as long as the populous is armed and willing to say no.

[JW1914]

Crime rates would surely rise immediately and immensely for a long time after such a thing if it were to take place. For one, people that are criminals now committing petty crimes like shoplifting etc to support drug habbits and such that choose NOT to mug people or break into homes BECAUSE they fear getting shot and killed....as well as being arrested, would very possibly start doing those things when they know that no one is going to have a gun to defend their life or property with. Being shot is a likely scenario when you break into someones house. Obviously people know that. Take away guns, that same criminal who used to have half a brain now very well may possibly say "Fuck it, lets do it" and step their game up and start breaking into homes or assaulting people because they don't fear people defending themselves. You know there are people out that that think like that and would most certainly become more daring in their criminal shit.

Christ I mean just the amount of women who protect themselves from being raped because they have a firearm is probably staggering. I'm sure 9/10 times they don't even have to fire a shot. Take those guns away, and there would be that much more sadness and disgust and mental issues stemming from chicks who got raped and couldn't do a damn thing about it. Someone go tell a lady who used a firearm to get out of a sexual assault or murder that she shouldn't have been allowed to have that gun. Let me know how that conversation works out.

Not to mention, for 100 years at least if not permanently criminals would still be in possession of firearms. They would be the only people with guns aside from police. I'm sure police would love that, knowing a whole bunch of people who were good people and armed are now not. And they know that there isn't anyone who is going to be able to stop a threat or offer assistance aside from other LEOs that are out there. Just think about if a group of slightly smarter criminals decided to start robbing evidence warehouses or police stations where they were storing everyone's confiscated firearms. Sure that may be an unlikely scenario. But there would be a shit ton of guns in certain places if something like a confiscation happened. They would have to be stored somewhere before being "destroyed". That's a damn good score for a group of criminals.

These people don't/can't think about logical negative effects of taking away guns from law abiding citizens. They cant comprehend that the deaths from mass shootings per year don't even come close to the number of people who would now die every year because they didn't have a firearm to protect their own ass or the asses around them. I don't have the numbers, but does anyone know how many people on average save a life every year with a firearm in the country? I'm sure it's a huge number and I'm sure even more are unreported or just not accounted for. These idiots don't want to think about that. Its like they just don't get that good people do good things with guns and without some type of magic spell that takes guns away from criminals too, you are condemning a lot of good people to death.

Even without guns, criminals still have plenty of ways of hurting good people that give enough reason to "justify" firearm ownership, even though it isnt something that needs to be justified, its a natural right to be able to protect yourself. There are just too many negative affects that come from taking guns out of good people's hands. Its very sad how many people accidentally die from gun shots every year and the black on black gun violence in poor areas of all cities is also terrible. Taking away the right to defend ones life from good people is not the answer. It just doesn't make sense and it would do way more harm then good.

(This is all hypothetical of course because I know or I should say I hope enough people would stand up to a confiscation if it ever happened, so I know theres a lot of us that WOULD still be armed )

[Pilot321]

We've seen these anti (legal) gun crusaders in the past. At one time they got some traction due to the media, and government teaming up to convince people all guns are BAD. However, they seem to be OK with criminals using guns in violent, and often fatal crime, as that problem continues to persist, and possibly even be encouraged by our "justice" system. More criminals means more BUSINESS, and $$$ for the court bureaucracies, police, judges, and lawyers.

However, I do believe the tide has turned, and even the media is not promoting new gun control measures as much as it used to, and the Chuck Schummers of the world realize that pushing more gun control laws is political suicide.

[pennlineman]

Chuck Schummers of the world realize that pushing more gun control laws is political suicide.

Apparently slow learners when you factor in the 94 elections.

[JStem1283]

Who do these anti-gun butt heads think is going to protect them from the people if they ban guns? The police, I think not.

According to those same people, the police are just evil racists.

[ungawa]

Apparently slow learners when you factor in the 94 elections.

Gun politics did not have a monumental impact in 1994. NRA will claim victory for every win and Slick Willy isn't called "Slick" because every word is sincere. He's called slick because every word has a hidden purpose.

[t1066]

Already being discussed: http://forum.pafoa.org/general-2/270...your-guns.html