How would a mass gun confiscation/2nd Amendment repeal work nationwide?

[Dr. MB]

How would it work?

It wouldn’t.

[Mr. Reactionary]

If the federal government actually tries to confiscate every single gun in America, then it would be time to destroy the federal government.

hear, hear

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

If the federal government actually tries to confiscate every single gun in America, then it would be time to destroy the federal government.

hear, hear

Now how about you two spending some time worrying about events that actually have a chance of happening?

[CatoMinor]

If the federal government actually tries to confiscate every single gun in America, then it would be time to destroy the federal government.

hear, hear

Now how about you two spending some time worrying about events that actually have a chance of happening?

To be fair, this is talk that is in a thread devoted to something with an almost zero chance of happening anytime soon.

[FairBol]

It wouldn’t.

This. It would turn into a second Civil War.

To be fair, gun confiscation is indeed happening in some places....like CT, for instance. 

"You know they mean no mercy, they found him with a gun....goodbye to the Brixton sun" -- The Clash, "The Guns of Brixton"

[Theodore]

If the federal government actually tries to confiscate every single gun in America, then it would be time to destroy the federal government.

hear, hear

[brucejoel99]

W/ regards to a mass gun confiscation being undertaken sans a 2nd Amendment repeal, within minutes (maybe even seconds), lawsuits would be filed in every court in the nation demanding a preliminary injunction to stop such confiscations. Given that Heller clearly makes such confiscations illegal, such an injunction would be granted, & that's pretty much the end of it.

But, for the purposes of a mass gun confiscation being undertaken due to a 2nd Amendment repeal, let's assume the said events are taking place: there'd likely be discontent. I'd hope that this would be expressed at the ballot box, not w/ arms, but many gun owners will likely not be happy w/ this change. Therefore, given the fact that gun owners' political demographics lean slightly more to the right than the rest of the country, I find it possible that there could potentially be a significant uprising under the right circumstances.

[Mr. Reactionary]

But, for the purposes of a mass gun confiscation being undertaken due to a 2nd Amendment repeal, let's assume the said events are taking place: there'd likely be discontent. I'd hope that this would be expressed at the ballot box, not w/ arms, but many gun owners will likely not be happy w/ this change. Therefore, given the fact that gun owners' political demographics lean slightly more to the right than the rest of the country, I find it possible that there could potentially be a significant uprising under the right circumstances.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unintended_Consequences_(novel)

(Edited to fix link - TF)

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Granted, one should never judge something from just a Wikipedia article, but it is telling how the author of that book apparently omits or ignores inconvenient facts when it suits him.

Facts such as that Gerald Drasen was selling complete kits of parts to be assembled into weapons that require registration, so it wasn't merely that he had the parts available to him.

Facts such as that the Lamplughs were flagrant tax cheats who were being raided (and their conviction ultimately upheld) because of their refusal to pay income taxes on their gun show business. (I wasn't able to find anything about what supposedly happened to their cat, but what I have been check of the author's claims so far leads me to suspect that it was likely a bit of dramatic license on the part of either the author or of the Lamplughs.

[Ohioguy29]

How would it work?

It wouldn’t.

[BenBurch]

If the federal government actually tries to confiscate every single gun in America, then it would be time to destroy the federal government.

This.  I am actually surprised that a Democrat would say this.  I am pleasantly surprised.

[All Along The Watchtower]

The (current Supreme Court view of) the Second Amendment + federalism + contemporary politics make all of this impossible. Why exactly are we discussing this again?

[BenBurch]

The (current Supreme Court view of) the Second Amendment + federalism + contemporary politics make all of this impossible. Why exactly are we discussing this again?

I believe this situation is basically the OP's dream.

[PragmaticPopulist]

This is why it's stupid when gun-rights advocates fearmonger about gun confiscation. It would be be long, expensive, and cause massive legal battles. If for example, and assault weapons ban were passed, people who already own them should be allowed to keep them, but no more should be allowed to be sold.

[Stranger in a strange land]

The short answer is that it wouldn't, which is why it will never happen. The U.S. is more likely to implement full Communism than mass gun confiscation.

[DINGO Joe]

Black helicopters would land and members of BLM and MS-13 would get out and take your guns.

[The Mikado]

That would never happen. The closest I could imagine is a national gun buyback program with the government giving substantial amounts of cash for each gun handed in. I think people would be surprised at just how many guns would be turned in for such a program.

[America Needs a 13-6 Progressive SCOTUS]

That would never happen. The closest I could imagine is a national gun buyback program with the government giving substantial amounts of cash for each gun handed in. I think people would be surprised at just how many guns would be turned in for such a program.

Gun owners do not deserve handouts like this.

Tax payers should not be forced to pay off costs like this.

Take their guns away without payment. It is the only sensible way to do it.

[Mr. Reactionary]

That would never happen. The closest I could imagine is a national gun buyback program with the government giving substantial amounts of cash for each gun handed in. I think people would be surprised at just how many guns would be turned in for such a program.

Gun owners do not deserve handouts like this.

Tax payers should not be forced to pay off costs like this.

Take their guns away without payment. It is the only sensible way to do it.

Just compensation is a constitutional requirement.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

That would never happen. The closest I could imagine is a national gun buyback program with the government giving substantial amounts of cash for each gun handed in. I think people would be surprised at just how many guns would be turned in for such a program.

Gun owners do not deserve handouts like this.

Tax payers should not be forced to pay off costs like this.

Take their guns away without payment. It is the only sensible way to do it.

Just compensation is a constitutional requirement.

Tell that to the slave owners.

Tho to be fair, if they hadn't started a war to keep slavery, they would have had to be compensated.

[Stand With Israel. Crush Hamas]

That would never happen. The closest I could imagine is a national gun buyback program with the government giving substantial amounts of cash for each gun handed in. I think people would be surprised at just how many guns would be turned in for such a program.

Gun owners do not deserve handouts like this.

Tax payers should not be forced to pay off costs like this.

Take their guns away without payment. It is the only sensible way to do it.

Sounds like you want more dead from gunfire, not less.

[WritOfCertiorari]

That would never happen. The closest I could imagine is a national gun buyback program with the government giving substantial amounts of cash for each gun handed in. I think people would be surprised at just how many guns would be turned in for such a program.

Gun owners do not deserve handouts like this.

Tax payers should not be forced to pay off costs like this.

Take their guns away without payment. It is the only sensible way to do it.

How is giving money to people after taking their property a handout?

The only time in US history that there was a mass seizure of property without compensation, it was after a civil war.

[America Needs a 13-6 Progressive SCOTUS]

Slavery is morally reprehensible, so slave owners should not be allowed compensation (and indeed, they did not receive compensation).
Guns are also morally reprehensible, so gun owners should not be allowed compensation either.

[Stand With Israel. Crush Hamas]

Slavery is morally reprehensible, so slave owners should not be allowed compensation (and indeed, they did not receive compensation).
Guns are also morally reprehensible, so gun owners should not be allowed compensation either.

Guns are constitutionally protected. You want to change that, pass an amendment, but good luck getting the needed supermajorities.

If you actually want to get guns off the streets and prevent deaths, be prepared to shell out money.

Some sort of bizarre moral argument of inherent culpability among gun owners is quite possibly the worst argument for gun control I've ever heard, in terms of winning minds and influencing people.

[WritOfCertiorari]

Slavery is morally reprehensible, so slave owners should not be allowed compensation (and indeed, they did not receive compensation).
Guns are also morally reprehensible, so gun owners should not be allowed compensation either.

This is basically the Is-Ought problem in a political context. It doesn't matter if you think something is immoral. The only thing that matters is political reality. For the slaves to be freed, over 700,000 Americans had to die in a country of about 30,000,000 people. In a country of 325,000,000 people, that means that over 7,000,000 would die in a modern civil war.

Solid is okay with 7 million people dying so that other people can have their guns taken away. Solid is a Donut Boy and needs to Read More about history. One day Solid will be an Adult and he'll learn to stop making Sophomoric arguments.