(Photo: NRA-ILA)
In a lengthy column published by the Boston Globe Saturday, staff writer David Scharfenberg made the argument for nationwide gun confiscation.
“The logic of gun control lies, at bottom, in substantially reducing the number of deadly weapons on the street — and confiscation is far and away the most effective approach,” wrote Scharfenberg.
Like many other gun grabbers, he points to the national “buyback” in Australia that followed the shooting at Port Arthur in 1996. The Aussie government was able to seize an estimated one-fifth of the country’s firearms, in addition to banning almost every gun under the sun.
Scharfenberg concludes by suggesting what many won’t, at least publicly, that for the anti-gun agenda it’s confiscation or bust.
“Ultimately, if gun-control advocates really want to stanch the blood, there’s no way around it: They’ll have to persuade more people of the need to confiscate millions of those firearms, as radical as that idea may now seem,”
Talk of confiscation is growing ever more common. In the mainstream media, in Hollywood and even in Washington, D.C. Remember when Hillary Clinton, on the presidential campaign trail in 2015, was asked this by a voter at a Town Hall meeting in New Hampshire:
“Recently, Australia managed to get away, or take away tens of thousands, millions, of handguns. In one year, they were all gone. Can we do that? If we can’t, why can’t we?”
SEE ALSO: Virgin Island Gov. Signs Confiscation Order Ahead of Hurricane Irma
You recall her response? It wasn’t, “That would be infringing on our Constitutionally-protected right to keep and bear arms,” nor “You’re crazy to even mention that.”
Clinton said, “I think it would be worth considering doing it on the national level, if that could be arranged.”
If that could be arranged it’s worth considering? Wow! Clinton’s always been anti-gun, but never before had she acknowledged the truth. The end game — as Scharfenberg rightfully identified — is confiscation. It is seizing lawfully owned firearms from law-abiding citizens.
You may be saying, well, talk is cheap. Billary lost the election, she’s no longer a threat. We have Trump now. We’re good.
But what about what Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) said after the Vegas shooting? When talking about legislation that would ban the mere possession of bump stocks, the House Minority Leader said that she “certainly hopes” that it would lead to more gun control.
“They’re going to say, ‘You give them bump stock, it’s going to be a slippery slope.’ I certainly hope so,” she told a reporter during an October news conference.
The bill that Pelosi was referring to was the one spearheaded by Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) known as the “Automatic Gunfire Prevention Act.” That bill included no exemption for current owners of bump stocks.
SEE ALSO: Wisconsin Bill Would Impose Storage Regulations on Gun Stores
When the government makes lawful property suddenly unlawful it’s a defacto form of confiscation. Most bans on black rifles or accessories usually contain a grandfather clause for current owners. This one did not.
What I fear is that all this talk of confiscation will lead to action. In some ways it already has. Many states are considering enacting “extreme risk protection order” (ERPO) schemes that allow accusers to petition courts to strip citizens of their 2A rights.
As I’ve said in the past, these ERPO laws are an affront to due process. A way for the government to confiscate today and litigate tomorrow. California, Connecticut, Oregon, Washington, and Indiana already have ERPO laws on the books.
Maybe I’m just hyper-sensitive nowadays. Maybe the threat of confiscation isn’t higher today than it was in years past (On that note, we can’t forget what happened in New Orleans during Hurricane Katrina).
Nevertheless, I’m not going to fall asleep at the wheel because the Don’s in office. I want to make sure confiscation remains a radical idea. Not something “worth considering” under any circumstances. Ever.
For the safety of the USA and all citizens, ALL politicians should be confiscated immediately.Their mouth`s rendered sealed.Their soft little hands that never had a callus,bound, to protect the young,the vulnerable,the unsuspecting,Their feet bound also,that they may not escape,nor soft pedal their crimes against humanity. Their bulging estates,built upon endless war,redistribution of our wealth to them. While calling for us to “make sacrifices”. In that,I agree with the politician. We should sacrifice HIM !.All those Fema camps ? Perfect environments for the weasels. Personal: to the politician ; you want my gun ? Might I suggest you reconsider.
The moment the SCOTUS decided that Law Enforcement did NOT have a duty/requirement to protect citizens was the moment that no matter what, all decision’s had been made as far as me or any of my family ever turning in any weapon.
If you ever want to see the largest civil war in history, let the US announce a gun confiscation. If they choose to do it state by state. Then each state MUST go to the states nearest them to fight the confiscation there. Must male sure they are always outnumbered.
Yes, I\’m SURE if they passed a law stating all persons in the USA must turn in their firearms, even criminals will line up to do so – they wouldn\’t want to break the law, would they? Oh wait… I can\’t believe how STUPID these idiot gun grabbers are.
You’re right, but the gun-grabbers are the politicians after total control. Not so much stupid as they are greedy and lustful for power. The stupid ones are the indoctrinated idiots that keep voting these communists into office.
David Scharfenberg eat shit
Mr. Scharfenberg’s self righteous and jornalistic piety, won’t prevent him from falling prey to the societal thugs in his employers readership area. If he truly believes his drivel, he should be in the wors5 neighborhoods 8n Boston, demanding that the thug population turn in their firearms. If he had the testicular courage to do that, his spoutings and effluvi7m spew, might have some credibility. Otherwise, it’s just more faux-moral outrage at inanimate objects, and no real solutions for the black on black genocide in his city as well as the other Marxist Progressive strongholds in this Republic.
Right on!
First thing first.
The war on drugs has been going on for over 60 years, so first let’s have all the drugs picked up.
When all the drugs have been picked up then they can talk about picking up the guns
That’s a good point considering that almost all of the mass shooters (other than gang members and Islamic terrorists) were on prescription anti-depression meds. But with the huge kick-backs from the pharmaceutical companies to our law makers, that will never happen.
For the war on drugs to be a success you would first have to shut down the drug running by the CIA,Politicians,ATF,law enforcement etc…there are billions of dollars involved and none of these entities are going to give up their money machines
for any reasons..taking away our guns would only benefit them.
For now, the US Constitution and the SCOTS says it is our constitutional right to keep and bear arms. As to how those rights may degenerate over time … well … time (and our elected officials) will tell. But until the 2nd amendment is repealed or changed and /or the Constitution is discarded altogether by some future controlling Leftist government, we will still be able to own (some type) of firearms legally. That being said, the Left will continue to pick and pick and pick away at our gun rights in the meantime. Even IF the government was to pass into law a confiscation or voluntary buyback program of some kind, there are an estimated 357,000,000 (some accounts say possibly 500,000,000) firearms in the USA. Assuming a very low estimate of only 250,000,000 firearms in the USA and a presumption that 80% of the people turn them in (I know, 80% is totally unreal), that would still leave 50,000,000 (now illegal) firearms in the USA – and we all know the majority of the people who will NOT turn them in WILL BE THE CRIMINALS IN THE FIRST PLACE – and they will still acquire them and sell them, etc. no matter what laws we have. Pandora’s box on firearms was opened a LONG time ago. By my estimate, that may have occurred in the 1970s when gun violence (and guns in general) started to become more glorified in the movies and in the gang and rap culture. People, it’s too late to put this Jeanie back in the bottle. The better thing to do now is to be armed against those bad people who would do us harm.
All that this would accomplish would be giving all the power to the the government and the criminals, neither of which obey the laws anyway. We are now citizens because of the Second Amendment, but if you want to live as a subject, this is what you need to do.
Here is a little history on gun confiscation for you.
In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control. From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents,
unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend
themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, a total of 13 million Jews and
others who were unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated.
China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable
to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated.
Guatemala established gun control in 1964. From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to
defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend
themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 1975 to 1977, one million educated people, unable
to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
56 million defenseless people rounded up and exterminated in the 20th Century because of gun
control:
You won’t see this data on the US evening news, or hear politicians disseminating this information.
Guns in the hands of honest citizens save lives and property and, yes, gun-control laws adversely
affect only the law-abiding citizens.
Take note my fellow Americans, before it’s too late!
The next time someone talks in favor of gun control, please remind them of this history lesson.
With guns, we are “citizens”. Without them, we are “subjects”.
During WWII the Japanese decided not to invade America because they knew most Americans were ARMED!
If you value your freedom, please spread this antigun-control message to all of your friends.
SWITZERLAND ISSUES EVERY HOUSEHOLD A GUN SWITZERLAND’S GOVERNMENT TRAINS EVERY ADULT THEY ISSUE A RIFLE. SWITZERLAND HAS THE LOWEST GUN RELATED CRIME RATE OF ANY CIVILIZED COUNTRY IN THE WORLD!!!
IT’S A NO BRAINIER!
DON’T LET OUR GOVERNMENT WASTE MILLIONS OF OUR TAX DOLLARS IN AN EFFORT TO MAKE ALL LAW ABIDING CITIZENS AN EASY TARGET.
Spread the word everywhere you can that you are a firm believer in the 2nd Amendment!
It’s time to speak loud before they try to silence and disarm us.
You’re not imagining it, history shows that governments always manipulate tragedies to attempt to
disarm the people.
Excellent job!
I would also recommend that everyone that wants to maintain our freedoms, join one or more pro 2nd Amendment organizations such as the NRA (National Rifle Association @ NRA.org ), the GOA (Gun Owners of America @ GunOwners.org ), the NSSF (National Shooting Sports Foundation @ NSSF.org ), the SAF (Second Amendment Foundation @ SAF.org ), or many others, including local chapters and organizations. The NRA and GOA are the largest of these with memberships in the millions (over 5 million in the NRA and growing fast, and about 1.5 million in the GOA).
Well said!
. . . let the Democrats do the door to door confiscating and see how it goes for them!
Not a chance, any of them have the will or the courage, Democrats need a totalitarian reg8me, to prosper, which is why, they want/need those who can think, to be disarmed by the Statists.
It is amazing how many highly educated people are so ignorant. The Constitution of the United States guarantees to each state and every citizen of each state a “Republican” for of government. There two (2) types of republican governments. A “Limited” government with a President and a Congress. The second is an “Unlimited” government with a Prime Minister and a Parliament. What is the difference? Let us look at lawyers. If you hire a lawyer you instruct him on what you want him to do. You tell him what he is authorized to do and what is not allowed to do. If you hire a lawyer and give him “Power Of Attorney” he can do whatever he wants with you and your property and you have no say so about it. Australia, England and Canada are all “Parliamentary” governments and they all have done some type of gun control. Their citizens rights vary with the mood of who ever is in office at the time. Not so in America. Our government was created to insure the rights of the people.
A State Constitution is a “Direct Legislative Act Of The Sovereign People” of that state. The Federal Constitution is a “Direct Legislative Act Of The Sovereign People Of The States”. The only way to legally confiscate guns would be to legally change the wording in all fifty (50) State Constitutions and the Federal Constitution as well. All working would have to say basically the same thing.
What we are talking about here is not only taking away aright of every citizen in the United States but changing the very form of our government itself.
I don’t have any guns. They were all stolen. Oh and did I fail to mention that even if I did it and they would come to get them I would give them to them barrel end first. Oops I guess it was loaded after all. Damn. My bad.
Hand over? I’m afraid you’re gonna have to come in person and take it. You’d best bring yours when you do.
3 percenter to the end
Did you mean that as an insult or compliment? I would consider it a compliment. However, NOT a 3 percenter to the end, but to a new beginning.
Was this pencilneck volunteering to go door to door? Can’t wait to see him.
“Sometimes the tree of liberty needs to be watered”
FROM MY COLD DEAD HAND SIMPLE
An idea. If this is enacted, then any lawyer who represents someone who is found guilty or goes free and commits another crime, looses their license and goes to jail for a minimum of 10 years. That’s fair!
Ditto with judges…..or any U.S. president who grants clemency–impeachment might be appropriate if still in office.
I predict a civil war if the thought of confiscating guns is taken into action. That would be another big problem along with all of our others. Between the North Koreans, butt fucking faggot Muslims, and the left wing butterflies I don’t feel like I am loved. I want to have a “safe space” for law abiding, gun toting, proud Americans to go when they feel threatened by Hillary’s or Pelosi’ s threats. Why not bad video games that are violent? Use the wasted effort of taking legal, law abiding, citizen’s weapons to do surveillance on mosques, child molesters, drug dealers, illegal aliens, and violent people that are mentally deficient. WE ARE THE EASIER TARGET. WE FOLLOW THE LAWS.
Amen to that brother!!!
You are correct: full scale civil war. That’s IF they could find anyone fool enough to actually try and confiscate anything. Big IF.
For now. Until they try confiscation. When that happens I guess it will make me a criminal and therefore since I know my fate it makes me killing them free
How many times has the left said “We don’t want your guns, just a few reasonable restrictions” But every once in a while they let the truth slip out. The loon Giffords even wants you flintlock.
You know how dirty the politicians are, especially the democrats!!!
To paraphrase Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran, “We will march the Libtards into the sea!”
Most likely off the coast of California…
Democrats libs and nuts
Please remember the police coming for your firearms are just tools of the job they do. Most will be behind you and anti confiscation. It is individuals and collections of people who write these ridiculous opinions and the politicians who make the laws, that should be held to accountability and whatever form this takes.
You absolutely MAY NOT and CANNOT count on this. That *some* Law Enforcement Personnel might be sympathetic to honest and lawful gun owners absolutely do NOT guarantee that as a whole they will not disobey orders from above. This is a FACT proved by the well known example of what happened in Occupied Europe during WWII. In their huge majority law enforcement personnel in said occupied territories stood at attention and followed the orders of the Quislings put in place by the Germans. It was French Police who rounded up the Jews at the Vel d’Hiv, who guarded and transported the Jews at Drancy, the French Gendarmes who burnt villages in the Vercors, Dutch police and informers who arrested Ann Frank just to cite the most infamous. Look up the numbers of the nationals in the police forces of the occupied countries who largely outnumbered the German police personnel in said country such as the Gestapo and the SD, the Feldgendarmerie and so on. Even the Germans I forget if it was Abetz or Oberg stated “without the locals, we could not have done it…”
So trusting that the police WILL be on our side, as psychologically pleasant and reassuring as it may is a lure and deadly gamble.
On a smaller scale, gun confiscation in New Orleans after hurricane Katrina is another example of law enforcement following their orders rather than Constitutional law.
Nope. If they are complicit they are enemies.
The problem with our society is not a gun culture problem, it’s a plain old culture problem. Man has been killing man since Cain & Abel with everything from rocks to H-bombs. Removing all guns from the landscape (if it were possible) wouldn’t change man, we would find other ways to kill each other. I can’t understand the fascination with guns when there are more imminent threats to public safety such as drugs, alcohol and tobacco which claim tens of thousands of lives every year.
You are very correct. The facts prove your point as :The USA has fewer violent crimes than most of Europe and Australia.
2013 FBI report shows violent crime including murder is at a 45 year low in the USA. Europe stats show:
A breakdown of the statistics, which were compiled into league tables, revealed that violent crime in the UK had increased from 652,974 offenses in 1998 to more than 1.15 million crimes in 2007.
It means there are over 2,000 crimes recorded per 100,000 population in the UK, making it the most violent place in Europe.
Austria is second, with a rate of 1,677 per 100,000 people, followed by Sweden, Belgium, Finland and Holland.
By comparison, America has an estimated rate of 466 violent crimes per 100,000 population.
France recorded 324,765 violent crimes in 2007 – a 67 per cent increase in the past decade – at a rate of 504 per 100,000 population.
And almost all of Central and South America have much higher crime rates. Even the “retirement paradise” of Belize.
But you are looking at it from the wrong view point. It isn’t about the guns as much as it is about controlling the masses. Look at the history of those who were semi successful at disarming the public. I would rather die standing upright and free than beaten down in csptivity to depraved self centered demonic animals who call themselves good Will ambassadors of world unity
It’s laughable that these clueless liberal-commies actually think that we’ll just GIVE UP OUR GUNS without a fight….
They’d better bring ALOT of body bags here in GA…
Here in Oklahoma, too, Mort!
But problematically… they HAVE one hell of a lot of body bags. In 2016, Homeland Security admitted to Congress that they had already purchased 100 million body bags, and stored them in ten regional depositories around the country. Interestingly, those depositories are not located in metropolitan areas… rather, they are near small towns (the largest nearby population center is Little Rock, AR).
I take it that the people who want to do this, do not want to be the people who collect our Firearms! Well, who ever they send to take mine will die!
I think you have finally hit on a way to “Drain the swamp.” Mandate the congress critters who pass the law must be the enforcers of the law. Would love to see Generals Pulosi, Feinstein, et al advancing up the driveways of middle America!
Woohoo! That would be quite a sight. Nancy and Diane coming up the driveway in their motorized wheelchairs to collect our firearms. I wonder if they would have their wheelchairs up-armored against those evil armor piercing 5.56 rounds?
Molon Labe
Our challenge isn’t guns — it’s certain classes & groups of people who are responsible for the vast majority of violent crime in America.
More than 99% of legal gun owners & concealed carry permit holders never commit even a minor criminal infraction. Nearly all of the butchery on the streets of primarily Democrat-controlled cities is done by people who are not legally entitled to possess a weapon — which was sold to them by people, who if they could vote, would vote Democrat.
The Democrat & RINO drive for gun control has nothing in reality to do with public safety: it is entirely about social control & political dominance.
Never attribute a positive motive to any Democrat or “bipartisan” gun control effort.
Australia has no Bill of Rights nor an equivalent Right to Bear Arms (2nd Amendment) as in the US Constitution. Boston needs to remember that if it wasn\’t for guns in the hands of the original Patriots, they, and the rest of us, would have British accents.
In Boston, it’s even worse. Instead of British accent they ended up with that weird “Boston” accent.
They also never talk about the gun problem in their Aussie gun free utopia. I saw a show on the History Channel (I think) about the drug trade in Australia. All of the drug runners, dealers, etc. are armed to the teeth. Only the law abiding citizens are disarmed. “When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns”.
During the nine years following the Great 1996 Gun Grab, Australia’s murder rate did indeed drop a little (from an average of 2,998 to 2,992 per year). That is statistically irrelevant (by any standard), but it is admittedly a tiny drop.
However, the rates of all other violent crime (assault, robbery, armed robbery, home invasion, arson… EVERY other violent crime) more than quadrupled! The average Australian citizen stood a very tiny bit less likelihood of being murdered, but was four times as likely to be a victim of violent crime!! Not exactly a world-class trade-off… and not in any way acceptable to me and my family. So I sincerely invite gun-grabbing politicians and their ilk to cheerfully go engage in an act of auto-eroticism!
A wild a$$ pipe dream…
Your reaction is the one that the gun grabbing left is hoping for – complacency.
At least the bastard was candid enough to called it what it is; confiscation. The problem with this clowns argument is the Australians have no constitutional rights so, the government can do whatever it pleases and the courts do less. Great Britain granted Australia freedom. We fought for ours.
And we will again, if need be.
Ah, yes – they cited wonderful gun confiscation in Australia and how much it lowered gun crime. Here’s a recent take on how they did some statistical cherry-picking to make it look like crime went down as a result of the gun grab:
https://www.nraila.org/articles/20171109/new-evidence-against-gun-confiscation