On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 18:33:36 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:

On 11/13/2013 5:37 PM, Califbill wrote:

iBoaterer wrote:

In article , says...




Refer to John.. he has it... it's all leading to confiscation, the
desired outcome. Problem is libs don't ever compromise, they just think
they are smarter than you..

Oh, man, there goes that jawbone again!

What a childish post.



There's no way guns will ever be "confiscated" as long as the
Constitution exists.

What *will* happen over the years is a state by state tighter reign on
types of permits, etc. I suspect concealed carry permits will become
much more difficult to obtain in years to come. In this state the
standard "for all lawful purposes" reason is no longer sufficient for a
concealed carry permit in an increasing number of towns. You have to
have more of a reason. You will still get a permit, but for home
defense, hunting or target practice only and you will not be permitted
to carry a concealed, loaded firearm.


That will certainly reduce the number of firearms carried by law-abiding citizens. To say that guns
will never be confiscated as long as the Constitution exists implies that bending of the
Constitution cannot occur. We both know better than that. Britain provides an interesting example:

From: http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424127887323777204578195470446855466

"Since 1920, anyone in Britain wanting a handgun had to obtain a certificate from his local police
stating he was fit to own a weapon and had good reason to have one. Over the years, the definition
of "good reason" gradually narrowed. By 1969, self-defense was never a good reason for a permit.

After Hungerford, the British government banned semiautomatic rifles and brought shotguns—the last
type of firearm that could be purchased with a simple show of fitness—under controls similar to
those in place for pistols and rifles. Magazines were limited to two shells with a third in the
chamber.

Dunblane had a more dramatic impact. Hamilton had a firearm certificate, although according to the
rules he should not have been granted one. A media frenzy coupled with an emotional campaign by
parents of Dunblane resulted in the Firearms Act of 1998, which instituted a nearly complete ban on
handguns. Owners of pistols were required to turn them in. The penalty for illegal possession of a
pistol is up to 10 years in prison.

The results have not been what proponents of the act wanted. Within a decade of the handgun ban and
the confiscation of handguns from registered owners, crime with handguns had doubled according to
British government crime reports. Gun crime, not a serious problem in the past, now is. Armed street
gangs have some British police carrying guns for the first time. Moreover, another massacre occurred
in June 2010. Derrick Bird, a taxi driver in Cumbria, shot his brother and a colleague then drove
off through rural villages killing 12 people and injuring 11 more before killing himself.


John H. -- Hope you're having a great day!