What would realistically happen if the US government started seizing all privately owned assault rifles?
(Answer containing assumtions. I assume you're refering to 'assault weapons', not 'assault rifles'. Since 'assault weapon' means whatever the person using the term wants it to mean, I assume that you mean that you want to take any scary-looking modern-ish rifles away.)What would happen is massive civil unrest, and bloodshed the likes of which haven't been seen on this soil since the early 1860'sThere are close to 100 million gun owners in the country. Let's make another assumption and guess that 10 percent of them have 'scary looking rifles' of one kind or another. That leaves 10 million people you're trying to take weapons from. Let's make another assumption: at least half those people won't want to give them up. That leaves 5 million people that will have to have theirs taken by force. 5 million people is roughly twice the number of police and military combined. Here I'll make another assumtion: at least a quarter of police and military would refuse to comply, and at least half of those would actively resist. Now (based on a series of assumptions and estimations) we have just over 5 million people on one side, and anout 2 million on the other side. Nobody is going to want to fire the first shot, but as soon as someone does, all bets are off. A civil war will have started. People will quickly take sides. My guess, honestly, is that it will be split about 25/75, with 75% supporting the seizures, because the media will be on that side. But popular support will be less important in the beginning than which side is willing to actually fight. Those against seizure are more likely to be willing to fight than those for it. The last time there was something like a civil war in this country, between battlefield deaths and deaths from illness, nearly 700,000 people died. We have better medical technology now, so fewer are likely to die from disease, and masses force-on-force battles would be rare, so the numbers killed at once will be lower, but the war is likely to linger for much longer than that conflict did.All in all, I'd expect no fewer than a half-million deaths.
What would happen if guns were banned for civilians?
In a country like the United States, it would be a complete and utter disaster of epic proportions. It would cause massive civil unrest, increased crime, and an unprecedented proliferation of guns throughout the land. It would also present a logistical and a tactical nightmare for law enforcement and those responsible for enforcing this policy. You would see a public backlash like no other, and it would essentially be impossible to enforce. If an enforcement strategy was attempted with any kind of vigor, it would result in a lot of dead police, government officials, and citizens. Additionally, with the amount of money, the attachment to historical customs, and supply of armaments that exists in the US, an arms bonanza and free-for-all would ensue. The arms market would be better than a third world war zone. You would begin to see military grade weapons become available for sale like RPGs, hand grenades, heavy machine guns, and small artillery shells. The United States is the biggest arms dealer on the planet by a long shot, so it would be foolish to think a gun ban would result in limiting the amount of guns in America. You would also see a major increase in private manufacture and importation of arms and ammunition. The amount of firearms knowledge and equipment possessed by many in the US is sufficient to manufacture arms in spite of any effect a total gun ban could accomplish. Although you would likely see an increase in prices of armaments due to the ban, this would encourage the illicit sale, importation, and manufacture by opportunists motivated by the immense profits to be made. These opportunists are likely to include some individuals in charge of armories in militaries, law enforcement, and arms suppliers to governments. If the US suddenly passed a total gun ban, it would create an extremely dangerous and volatile environment that will destabilize civil, political, and economic affairs of the country. It could even be a catalyst for civil war in the United States.
What would happen if, instead of confiscating guns, the government confiscated Hollywood mansions to house the immigrants?
That would be a violation of the 4th amendment rather than the 2nd.It would be unconstitutional if it came before an honest judge.
How can the government legally confiscate guns?
Furthermore , have you noticed that every time it has occurred it's always been to "protect" the people. I don't know about you but I would just as soon take the responsibility for my own protection... Armed we are citizens, unarmed we are subjects. Need I say more????
SHOULD ASSAULT WEAPONS be banned and illegal.?
POLITCS- WE HAVE GUN RIGHTS. BUT politicians, state and local government want to limit us to the most basic of guns. assault weapon bans are happening both at state level and county levels. the feds and supreme court have not blocked them. WE NEED ASSAULT RIFLES. OR WILL BE DEFENSEless against brutal repressive government. the supreme court has refused to hear cases leaving in contact state law bans
Can pro-gun advocates come up with a more intelligent argument?
"When catapults are outlawed, only outlaws will have catapults." The problem isn't legal gun ownership. The onus here are the criminals who acquire guns and abuse them for violent ends. I rarely here of incidents involving a legal gun owner and an innocent victim. Guns are but a means for some whereas katanas appeal to others(perhaps a bit more gruesome though.