This article has been making the social media rounds: http://www.alloutdoor.com/2016/08/31/democrats-will-never-confiscate-guns-instead-youll-hand/ in which the author makes the case that “big government knows all, sees all, and resistance is futile.”
It is worth reading, because quite literally that is one of the potential playbooks gun control advocates have used, and will probably use again.
But I don’t think it is likely for a number of reasons:
Just because the government possesses information on how many million gun owners are in the US through illegal domestic monitoring policies, it doesn’t mean they can turn that into an actionable plan fast enough to make a difference.
The only way for “the government” to make a comprehensive list that would make a “turn in your guns or we take your kids and freeze your assets” threat possible is if the government could actually do so in a way that wouldn’t utterly destroy the country.
Is this country ready for another 50 million children in the foster care system? No
Is this country ready for 40% of the population, and 60% of the adult male population to just not show up for work because “what’s the point in working since my assetts are frozen?” That would make matters a might problematic for funding the government.
These are the obvious second order effects of trying to use “lawfare” to bring about gun confiscation compliance.
After all, if the government really did “know all, see all” then people wouldn’t be getting away with cheating on their taxes, now would they? I know that’s a logical fallacy, because government often turns a blind eye to lawbreaking that it don’t care so much about (until you run for political office, then all of a sudden tax returns somehow matter I suppose).
So you should read the article, and understand that more than likely anything looking like “legal arm twisting” to get people to turn into guns is going to be extremely narrow at first. Maybe those evil 50 BMG weapons, cause no one needs a dangerous big bore sniper rifles, right? It only affects a very small portion of gun owners, and states like California have already established a legal precedent for requiring registration and then confiscation through adding more laws later on.
After the 50 BMGs it will be things like Accuracy International Artic Warfare Magnum or Timberwolf Prairie Magnum rifles, because who needs a 338 Lapua military sniper rifle? And after that it will be NFA firearms held in “Trust” because of a “re-interpretation” of the NFA trust rules by the ATF.
One small change at a time, over the course of years, and sure, this level of massive gun confiscation could work.
The last guns that they’ll come for will be the most popular. Colts, Glocks, AR-15s, AKs, and SKS variants. Because there are literally millions of those, and that would affect millions of people, but at this point the larger segment of society has been hearing for years about people giving up their guns and so any resistance will find no popular support. Going slow, in a limited fashion, creates the illusion that confiscation is reasonable.
So, what do you do?
Get weapons off paper, get a bunch of 80% lowers and start to milling, and start now to build your collection of firearms that would literally require a “house to house” confiscation campaign to do anything about.
In the prepping world, resources that are cached are resources lost in the event of an immediate emergency. But, if you have twelve guns, you personally cannot use twelve guns in response to an immediate emergency so it makes good sense to cache a few somewhere that they can’t be confiscated in response to an immediate emergency (Hurricane Katrina saw the largest domestic door to door gun confiscation efforts in modern memory).
Get some bullet molds, learn to use them. Stockpile powder, that you pay cash for. Stockpile primers, they generally don’t go bad very quickly at all.
Building resiliency into any system makes it harder to topple. Comments are open.