Taking vs. restricting

[Ben S]

I'm not going crazy and saying BHO is about to order all the henchman to come take our guns in the night,
BUT...

In the event of another AWB, do you think it's more likely that they will just restrict what we can buy, the way they did last time, or will they actually ban ownership and demand that we turn them in?

How did it go down in England when their gun control laws went nuts? Did they first restrict buying, or did they go straight for confiscation?

Has this idea influenced the way that you buy/what you buy?

[Erik]

I dont know the history of the English gun ban specifically, but the usual steps when they ban something in these places are something like this:

1. Lots of propaganda of how bad it is, to discourage new people starting doing it, and to alienate those doing it from those that never done it. Examples: "guns are bad, guns aren't needed, hundreds of people get hurt by guns every year, noone needs those 'star wars' weapons", etc (yes, the "star wars" line is an actual quoute of the person in charge of weapons regulations at our national police)
2. Regulate it heavily, make it such a pain to own or do it that only those with hardcore interest keep trying, everyone else gives up on it because of all the hazzle. Example: gun licenses with expiration date, waiting periods, max number of guns, limitations on how to store and transport, etc
3. Make it expensive so people cant afford it. For instance adding taxes, fees, environmental taxes, or make it certain expensive equipment mandatory, for instance a gevernment approved gunsafe, lockable guncase for transport, kead tax on ammunition, etc..
4. Start limit supply. Simply deny new licences for certain weapons, make it hard and expensive to find ammunition and spare parts.
5. Deny the ability to use. This is where certain weapons cant be stored at home, but only at certain sites, for instance a gun depot, a gun club, etc.
6. Ban all out usage of those types of wepons. You can still own it, but you need to plug the barrel so it cant be used.
An alternative to this is to ban all weapons, and demand people to turn them in themselfes or face criminal charges. (Sure, you can try to claim it got stolen, but you still cant buy ammo for it, or use it anywhere in public anymore. If they ever find out, you loose all your guns.)
7. Start over at 4 with new type of guns. Now there will be fewer people owning guns, so it will be even less uproar.

This way, outright confiscation isn't needed.
It does happen in some cases, as if police has a reason to enter your house and they feel you dont store them safely, or if you should happen to break a law so they pull your licences, but the all out door to door confiscation isn't really how it's done.

Btw, variations of this is how they ban anything they dont like but where there are lots of people who enjoy doing it.

[Ben S]

I understand what you are saying. And you are right. It is a slow progression that will get us. My point was really to ask about this because in our last ban, if you already owned the gun or mags, you were "grandfathered in."

I was simply asking how likely it is that the next ban will not allow us to be grandfathered. If we can't grandfather a gun we already own, it becomes illegal to own that gun.

I appreciate the input. Especially from a guy in Europe who knows first hand how these things go. I'll make sure to get rid of my Star Wars guns. Nobody NEEDS those anyway.

[George guy]

In terms of "Grandfathering", I think it will be allowed at first.

Then the grandfather clause will be later amended to give you a certain time period to register and get a permit.

[Erik]

Well, I think they will pretty much use the same tactic if they decide to do it there.

It will just upset people way too much if they start going door to door and confiscate weapons, so what I think they will do is to let you "grandfather in", and then just make it a hazzle to own them and get ammo. Like require special ranges for them, require them stored in approved gunsafes, etc... Then just round them up one by one when they get a chance, or do a confiscation drive when they get an opportunity, like in a Katrina situation.

It's actually not that hard to do, if the political climate will allow it.

As for the "star wars" guns, seems I forgot to explain that. What he referred to was IPSC, with standard semiautomatics, some of them have reddot sights...

[Jered]

Is there a Fifth Amendment argument of the taking of private property for public use, there?

There's also some interesting Fifth Amendment implications.