Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Yeah, The military Would Never Turn on Us

1. The only guns permitted will be the following:
a. Smoothbore or Rifled muzzle-loading blackpowder muskets. No 7-11 in history has ever been held up with one of these.
b. Double-barrel breech-loading shotguns. Hunting with these is valid.
c. Bolt-action rifles with a magazine capacity no greater than five rounds. Like I said, hunting is valid. But if you cannot bring down a defenseless deer in under five rounds, then you have no fking reason to be holding a killing tool in the first place.

2. We will pry your gun from your cold, dead, fingers. That is because I am willing to wait until you die, hopefully of natural causes. Guns, except for the three approved categories, cannot be inherited. When you die your weapons must be turned into the local police department, which will then destroy them. (Weapons of historical significance will be de-milled, but may be preserved.)

3. Police departments are no longer allowed to sell or auction weapons used in crimes after the cases have been closed. (That will piss off some cops, since they really need this money. But you know what they need more? Less violence and death. By continuing the process of weapon recirculation, they are only making their jobs -- or the jobs of some other cops -- harder.)

4. We will submit a new tax on ammunition. In the first two years it will be 400 percent of the current retail cost of that type of ammunition. (Exemptions for the ammo used by the approved weapons.) Thereafter it will increase by 20 percent per year.

5. We will initiate a nationwide "buy-back" program, effective immediately, with the payouts coming from the DoD budget. This buy-back program will start purchasing weapons at 200 percent of their face value the first year, 150 percent the second year, 100 percent the third year. Thereafter there will be a 10 year pause, at which point the guns can be sold to the government at 10 percent of their value for the next 50 years.

6. The major gun manufactures of the United States, less those who create weapons for the federal government and the armed forces, will be bought out by the United States of America, for our own damned good.

I fail to see how this is evidence that the military would turn on us, but Ok...

Just another antigun nut case with a piece of brass stuck to his chest.

I fail to see how this is evidence that the military would turn on us, but Ok...

Just another antigun nut case with a piece of brass stuck to his chest.

Read the article. Then read the first paragraph of the "Dick Act" which he misquoted. The "militia" is not just the National Guard. It is also the "unorganized militia" which it also defines.

That guy is an anti-gun idiot that has no real idea of what he is talking about.

I guarantee they will find plenty like him to promote and place in charge of any such operation should they decide to implement it.

Dear Mr. Bateman:

You're dealing with a dichotomy in the demographic, and it's going to sink your plan.

There are certainly a large number of people in this country who seem to be congenitally conditioned, after some high-profile tragic event, to shriek, "Take our guns! Take our liberties! Take our privacy! Please! Just keep us s-a-a-a-a-a-fe!" There are frequently even enough of these people to give politicians enough cover to pass the laws to that effect that they've been keeping around in drawers somewhere against the next high-profile tragic event.

Your reasoning appeals to these people, and you will probably do very well among them.

But there's a problem: these people don't have any guns--or, really, any liberty or privacy, for that matter--to take. If you're going to actually take liberty and privacy and guns, you're going to need to get them from a whole different group of people, people who care very little what politicians have to say about such things and even less about what you have to say about them.

And this problem has three aspects that's going to make it completely intractable to you.

First, these people in the second group are the ones who have the guns. You can persuade the first group that the second group should give up their guns with a mere run-of-the-mill atrocity; but there's very little that will persuade the second group that they should give up their own guns. Very few of the second group will dutifully toddle down to the sheriff's office and turn in their guns; they'll make you come get them.

Second, even though these people are in the minority, there are an awful lot of them. An awful lot. If you scrape both the sides and the bottom of the barrel, you can come up with enough cops to do your gun confiscations that you'll have one cop for every 120 or so gun owners. And that 1:120 ratio, in addition to being wildly optimistic, works only right at the beginning; not very far down the line the ratio will be much smaller, both because a significant number of those cops will become leaky and floppy and hard to keep upright, and because even more of them will decide that they have better things to do than be ordered into the line of fire for you.

And third, you're floating this idea during the administration of Barack Obama. Many people have long anticipated the genesis of somebody like you out of that administration, and have therefore been buying guns and ammunition at rates rarely or never seen before in this country. The second demographic group is still a significant minority compared to the first demographic group, but it's growing now instead of shrinking. The publication of your article will make it grow even faster.

So...today isn't your day. You should wait for A) a Republican Presidency, B) a time when you have more actual coercive power over civilians than you do now, and C) a time when you can implement this plan rather than just crowing about it. The people who might be persuaded by an article like this are useless to you, and it will serve only to warn and organize the people who are dangerous to you.

You still won't get our guns, if you wait for such a time, but at least you'll probably get to kill more of us before we get you.

Because I don't give two whoops for him. He's an officer who wants to become a politician. A lower form of pond scum would be hard to find.

You can email it to him, if you like--or post it as a comment to his article. Claim it as your own, even; I don't mind.