How To Disarm America

[TGO David]

We're swamped with guns, but if we want to get rid of them, there is a way to do it

Sunday, April 29, 2007

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/07119/781629-374.stm

By Dan Simpson, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

The tragedy at Virginia Tech, with a mentally disturbed person gunning down 32 of America's finest -- intelligent working people with futures ahead of them -- puts once again into focus for Americans the phenomenon of an armed society.

Dan Simpson, a retired U.S. ambassador, is a Post-Gazette associate editor (dsimpson@post-gazette.com).

The likely underestimate of how many guns are wandering around America runs at 240 million in a population of about 300 million. What was clear at Virginia Tech is that at least two of those guns were in the wrong hands.

When people talk about doing something about guns in America, one of the points that comes to the fore is, "How could America disarm even if it wanted to? There are so many guns out there." Today I want to address the question of "how" -- if we decided to. Since I have little or no power to influence the "if" part of the issue, I will stick with "how."

Before anyone starts to hyperventilate about me as a crazed liberal zealot wanting to take the gun from his cold, dead hands, let me say what my experience is of guns.

As a child I played cowboys and Indians with cap guns. I had a Daisy Red Ryder B-B gun. My father had in his bedside table drawer an old pistol which I examined surreptitiously from time to time. When assigned to the American embassy in Beirut during the war in Lebanon, I sometimes carried a .357 Magnum, which I could fire accurately. I also learned there to handle and fire a variety of weapons, including Uzis and rocket-propelled grenade launchers.

I don't have any problem with hunting, although blowing away animals with high-powered weapons seems a pointless, no-contest affair to me. I suppose I would enjoy the fellowship of friends who are hunters.

Now, how would one disarm the American population? First of all, federal or state laws would need to make it a crime punishable by a $1,000 fine and one year in prison per weapon to possess a firearm. The population would then be given three months to turn in their guns, without penalty.

Hunters would be able to deposit their hunting weapons in a centrally located arsenal, heavily guarded, from which they would be able to withdraw them each hunting season upon presentation of a valid hunting license. The weapons would be required to be redeposited at the end of the season on pain of arrest. When hunters submitted their request for their weapons, federal, state and local checks would be made to establish that they had not been convicted of a violent crime since the last time they withdrew their weapons. In the process, arsenal staff would take at least a quick look at each hunter to try to affirm that he was not obviously unhinged.

It would have to be the case that the term "hunting weapon" did not include anti-tank ordnance, assault weapons, rocket-propelled grenade launchers or other weapons of war.

All antique or interesting nonhunting weapons would be required to be delivered to a local or regional museum, also to be under strict 24-hour-a-day guard. There they would be on display, if the owner desired, as part of an interesting exhibit of antique American weapons, as family heirlooms from proud wars past or as part of collections.

Gun dealers could continue their work, selling hunting and antique firearms. Dealers would be required to maintain very tight inventories. Any gun sold would be delivered immediately by the dealer to the nearest arsenal or the museum, not to the buyer.

The disarmament process would begin after the initial three-month amnesty. Special squads of police would be formed and trained to carry out the work. Then, on a random basis to permit no advance warning, city blocks and stretches of suburban and rural areas would be cordoned off and searches carried out in every business, dwelling and empty building. Thoroughness would be at the level of the sort of search that is carried out in Crime Scene Investigations. All firearms would be seized. The owners of weapons found in the searches would be prosecuted: $1,000 and one year in prison for each firearm.

Clearly, since such sweeps could not take place all across a city, county, state or the country at the same time, guns would move. But fairly quickly there would begin to be gun-swept, gun-free areas where there should be no firearms. If there were, those carrying them would be subject to quick confiscation and prosecution. On the streets it would be a question of stopping and searching anyone, even Grandma with her walker, with the same penalties for "carrying."

The "gun lobby" would no doubt try to head off in the courts such new laws and the actions to implement them. They might succeed in doing so, although the new approach would undoubtedly prompt new, vigorous debate on the subject. The Virginia Tech affair has already stimulated renewed discussion of the issue, although members of Congress so far seem to be staying under their desks on the subject. Some jurisdictions would undoubtedly take the opportunity of the chronic slowness of the courts to begin implementing the new approach in any case.

America's long land and sea borders present another kind of problem. It is easy to imagine mega-gun dealerships installing themselves in Mexico and perhaps in more remote parts of the Canadian border area to funnel guns into the United States. That would constitute a problem for American immigration authorities and the U.S. Coast Guard, but not an insurmountable one over time.

There also could conceivably be a rash of score-settling during hunting season as people drew out their weapons, ostensibly to shoot squirrels and deer, and began eliminating their perceived two-footed enemies. Given the general nature of hunting weapons and the fact that such killings are frequently time-sensitive, that seems a lesser sort of issue.

In any case, that is my idea of how it could be done. The desire to do so on the part of the American people is another question altogether, but one clearly raised again by the Blacksburg tragedy.

[TGO David]

Nothing shocks me any more. If any of you think that there aren't people in this country who would like to enact exactly this type of draconian anti-gun policy, you're wrong. Dead wrong.

[Guest Hornet Handler]

Nothing shocks me any more. If any of you think that there aren't people in this country who would like to enact exactly this type of draconian anti-gun policy, you're wrong. Dead wrong.

Unfortunatly there are to many that would love to do that.

[Guest DEIMOS]

Nothing shocks me anymore either, although I am often angered over the closed minded bigotry of the gun haters. No amount of fact, reason or education will sway their corroded minds.

[Punisher84]

That will never happen though. It's just some nutjob liberals wet dream. You wanna start another civil war? Enact some of the crap he's talking about. people will only be pushed so far in this country.

[TGO David]

people will only be pushed so far in this country.

Really? I started a thread about this on a forum not devoted to gun ownership and sadly the majority seem to suggest that they would comply rather than resist.

[saintsfanbrian]

I think, unfortunately, that until the first jack booted thugs actually used force to remove the guns from a home (fired shots) then most people will gladly turn them in.

[SkWaShDeM]

They could only accomplish this sort of socialist left-wing garbage pipe dream with a 100% left-wing/socialist composition to the Supreme Court, and somehow managing to get the Bill of Rights completely thrown out the window. I also have a feeling, that if the federal government tried that sort of crap, a lot of states would secede, just like the last time the federal government tried to take too much control over something that was properly a state level issue.

[DaveTN]

I don't have any problem with hunting, although blowing away animals with high-powered weapons seems a pointless, no-contest affair to me. I suppose I would enjoy the fellowship of friends who are hunters.

That’s a great quote; I need to remember that.

I am not a hunter; I am a shooter. And I am proud of the fact that you will never hear me use the word “Hunting†to try to justify the availability or legality of any firearm to law abiding citizens.

Nothing shocks me any more. If any of you think that there aren't people in this country who would like to enact exactly this type of draconian anti-gun policy, you're wrong. Dead wrong.

Hopefully the silent majority (many of us here) will not allow that to happen.

HOWEVER….. I remember that I laughed out loud when I heard that Hillary was running for the Senate in NY. I remember saying “WTF is going to vote for her?â€

I learned a lesson.

[molonlabetn]

There are some things worse than death... not the least of which would be living under the heel of a government to whom we meekly handed over our assurance of liberty.

I fear that it will only take a few more generations worth of liberal social engineering to desensitize the U.S. population into apathy... Unless we raise awareness, and make a stand, now.

I'm glad that I am not alone, though I fear that the number of patriots we assume to be a part of is not as large or devoted as we hope.

It has always been the few who made a difference. I can live with that.

[Punisher84]

"He bade me tell this story so all that should hear it, would remember bold Leonidas and his brave 300."

"Today the world will know, that few stood against many."

"There are of course those who do not want us to speak. I suspect even now, orders are being shouted into telephones, and men with guns will soon be on their way. Why? Because while the truncheon may be used in lieu of conversation, words will always retain their power. Words offer the means to meaning, and for those who will listen, the enunciation of truth. And the truth is, there is something terribly wrong with this country, isn't there? Cruelty and injustice, intolerance and oppression. And where once you had the freedom to object, to think and speak as you saw fit, you now have censors and systems of surveillance coercing your conformity and soliciting your submission. How did this happen? Who's to blame? Well certainly there are those more responsible than others, and they will be held accountable, but again truth be told, if you're looking for the guilty, you need only look into a mirror. I know why you did it. I know you were afraid. Who wouldn't be? War, terror, disease. There were a myriad of problems which conspired to corrupt your reason and rob you of your common sense."

"People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people."

[towerclimber37]

Unfortunately, the "jackbooted thugs" are already out..in Illinois.

quite properly, when they try to ram this sort of thing down a states collective throat...I would vote for succession rather than capitulation....if the vote didn't go...well then its either time to fish or cut bait.

all the nifty quotes in the world will never lend themselves to combat...and thats a mother huge decision for someone to make...knowing they're out gunned and out numbered. There are many here who feel strongly and are truly patriots..its well that they keep their own counsels in the respect that they don't voice their course of action.They have to, Unfortunately,because there Has been an erosion of freedoms in this country...but its been done at the poles and through politics...that sort of action will go on only as long as the MAJORITY of people put up with it...face it guys..we may not be the majority.

That won't stop me from voting though, or trying to educate those who have no idea that the removal of a societies' ability to force change on a government is the first step towards tyranny.

[Guest Len]

I have to agree. What I see in this country, day-to-day, especially among the younger generation, is lots and lots of APATHY. If no one cares, people in power can get away with anything they choose. My guess is that the non-caring majority is around 80%. I could go on forever about this....

I also want to say I agree with DaveTN when he wrote:

I am not a hunter; I am a shooter. And I am proud of the fact that you will never hear me use the word “Hunting†to try to justify the availability or legality of any firearm to law abiding citizens.

Really? I started a thread about this on a forum not devoted to gun ownership and sadly the majority seem to suggest that they would comply rather than resist.

[Guest Voodoo_1]

I'm glad that I am not alone, though I fear that the number of patriots we assume to be a part of is not as large or devoted as we hope.

Don't be surprised! Ever hear the phrase "walk softly, but carry a big stick"? There are many who might not say what they will do, if something like this occurred, but I believe their actions will speak louder than their words.

[molonlabetn]

Don't be surprised! Ever hear the phrase "walk softly, but carry a big stick"? There are many who might not say what they will do, if something like this occurred, but I believe their actions will speak louder than their words.

Yes, taking that into consideration as well... This state, and several others, would likely achieve sufficient support for survival. There would be a huge disparity in most areas, especially urban areas, however...

I have to wonder though, even here, when so few actually take any action presently... Thankfully, the ones who do, do so to the utmost.

[TGO David]

I have to wonder though, even here, when so few actually take any action presently... Thankfully, the ones who do, do so to the utmost.

Look at the dismal support the TFA gets in it's own backyard. I think that most people expect someone else to fight for their rights.

[jeepbus]

I don't think it will ever happen,at least I hope not.

[Guest RN MEDIC]

I wish I could agree, but I fear that only the end of time at the coming of the LORD will prevent the day when "THEY" come for our guns.

RN

[towerclimber37]

I agree with RN Medic.

Its been tried before...statistical probability says it'll happen again.

I can only hope that when they come, we'll have enough gumption to hold the line..

an afterthought...if we DO succeed in holding that line..I feel pretty sure that the government will collapse pretty quickly afterwards...

[Guest jackdog]

Tower at this point, in our history that may be a good thing.

[Guest CrazyLincoln]

This is EXACTLY what 2A was meant to prevent. When will these people understand that violent people will do violent things. A man recently beat his wife to death with a MICROWAVE. Its not the guns, its the people.

OK, I'll stop preaching to the chior.

[towerclimber37]

Jackdog,

I'm not so sure about that..what with so many enemies without..as well as the socialists working from within. It might just be a harder road than we imagine without that protective mantle of the U.S. military to keep hannibal outside the gates.

CrazyLincoln, I agree..it was put there by much smarter men than the ones that want to degrade it with the concept that it refers to state militias, and should be regulated in all sorts of ways so as to keep a thumb on us poor dumb throwbacks. Funny thing about that sort of reasoning ....when it comes to protection issues..they usually don't realize they're wrong until right before they hear the first half of a really loud bang.

All I can tell them is "when you see it...keep walking towards the light"

[Guest jackdog]

Tower, our Government is out of control. The red Chinese can and could devastate our economy with a few key Strokes on a computer. We have open borders that any one can walk through or smuggle into. We have the Bush administration doing everything it can to form a European union style government with the likes of Canada and Mexico. The time for this Grand experiment (the republic of the united States) ending is very much in view, to those who can see the moves on the giant chess board. The biggest stumbling block is our firearms. We are well past due for a revolution that would return our Government back to the people.

[Guest LeagueOf1291]

That will never happen though. It's just some nutjob liberals wet dream. You wanna start another civil war? Enact some of the crap he's talking about. people will only be pushed so far in this country.

If New Orleans is any indication, I'll have to disagree. Americans have handed power over to the state, and now the citizens are nearly powerless.

[Guest CrazyLincoln]

If New Orleans is any indication, I'll have to disagree. Americans have handed power over to the state, and now the citizens are nearly powerless.

First off, we are now learning of what happens when the first thing you do in a crisis is take peoples guns. Looters had a field day, and some over zealous cops shot some civlians. And then theres all the stuff with the FEMA trailers and the insurance claims.

If there is anything to be learned it is that one cannot rely on the government for everything, and despite the fact most LEOs work their tails off to serve and protect, and then some, individual people cannot rely on them being everywhere all the time.

Alas, America will not learn its lesson because we are constantly led to forget. Have we forgotten? While some horrific tradgedies have occoured in recent times, the most horrific massacre in our coutry's history happened almost 6 years ago and killed thousands WITHOUT A SHOT FIRED. Today this and more recent incidents have become an EXCUSE to attack one's personal rights rather than a REASON to address our country's problems and work towards a solution.

Ok, Ok, Feel soapbox creaking under my wieght......