Grouse

Just be aware of the fact the courts will not be helping you get any confiscated property returned. Nor will they reverse any monetary penalties you paid. They are not going to be on the side of gun owners when these bans take effect.

The car/gun analogy is better explained like this. Does someone need a car like this? What if the government decided to ban you from owning one of these because they felt you don't "need" it?

The government is banning guns because they are a threat to the government's monopoly on power and control, not because they give a crap about crime. These laws are most often enforced against ordinary, responsible gun owners for mere possession of a banned firearm. Criminals plea bargain the gun charges away when they make a deal in court. Cuomo let a lot of felons out of jail who used guns in crime.

For all those who have forgotten. The meme eliminates making me write it all out.

But if it's done in any way other than prescribed in the Constitution, it is illegal. If the people choose to live under illegal tyranny, they can't expect to be treated as free citizens anymore. I for one would not submit to such tyranny, and I believe many other's won't either. That's when there will be blood.

Last year Dems wanted resource cops removed from schools, Now they are worried about shootings at schools# can’t make this stuff up

It is. All gun control laws are. No law can require the individual to prove that he won’t violate another’s rights in the absence of evidence that he is going to. But this is precisely what gun control laws do. Gun control laws use force against the individual in the absence of any specific evidence that he is about to commit a crime. They say to the rational, responsible gun owner: You may not have or carry a gun because others have used them irrationally or irresponsibly. This is unjust and intolerable. The government may coercively intervene only when there is an objective threat that someone is going to use force. The government may respond only to specific threats. It has no right to initiate force against the innocent. And a gun owner is innocent until specific evidence arises that he is threatening to initiate force. “Laws prohibiting or regulating guns across the board represent the evil of preventive law and should be abolished.” - columnist Harry Binswanger

Unconstitutional laws are always unconstitutional, but they need to be removed. The unconstitutional handgun ban in Wash D.C. took 30 years to be declared unconstitutional and D.C. ignores the SCOTUS decision. That's corruption. Enforcing unconstitutional laws is tyranny. I'm not saying it doesn't happen in this land. I'm saying it's evidence of a corrupt government that ignores the Rule of Law. Majority vote elects our representatives, but it doesn't stop corruption, especially when the majority of voters are uninformed, misinformed or clueless. The people have abdicated their power over the government. They get the type of government they deserve.

President Joe Biden’s administration, troublingly, believes warrantless seizure of your firearms is perfectly reasonable even if the reason to believe you pose a danger to yourself or others is practically nonexistent. https://www.westernjournal.com/biden-wants-scotus-let-cops-seize-guns-without-warrant/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=westernjournalism&utm_content=2021-03-25&utm_campaign=manualpost&fbclid=IwAR2SyAaSfrz19mvt01pEdbaCOKkzXIfhXhGVH_hZqpiDAU1HXW5g9oCi2FQ

True. But it is corruption that causes them to fail. If we follow the US Constitution and The Bill of Rights, we will continue to thrive as we have done for 245 years. If we abuse the Rule of Law, we fail. The founders built a mechanism for change into the Constitution. Not using it is corrupt.

Not True. That's why we have a Bill of Rights. Unconstitutional laws are void. Majority Rule is 51% ruling the 49%. That's tyranny. That's why we are a representative republic, so the majority cannot tyrannize the minority.

The gun control argument can be easily answered with this question. BTW, meme's just save me a lot of work retyping the info.

What happens? They ban them too.

Sure, but they don't get the power to take away inalienable rights when they're sworn in.

They tried to ban them years ago and ran against too much public opposition. They plan to try again when the public will support it. People are being conditioned by propaganda to think that will make them safer. I guess they don't understand black markets and the violence that comes with them, drug war and prohibition not withstanding.

A majority cannot vote to remove an inalienable right. If it can, we have tyranny. BTW, the government isn't putting this up for a vote, so assuming the majority would vote to ban is just an assumption.

A pump action shotgun with an 8 round tubular magazine is a formidable weapon and can be reloaded quickly. They will be banned soon if the line isn't drawn against this tyranny now. And soon after, a pump holding 5 or more rounds will be banned.