Mullah Obama said he isn’t looking to take our guns. Bullshit!!
He would scale the outside of the Washington Monument without climbing gear to lie to us, rather stand on the ground to tell the truth – about anything. And Hillary is no better. She is worse – if that is even possible.

Strange how crime rates went down years ago in areas that pushed Project Exile. Is it racist to point out that crime has gone down while the rate of incarceration has gone up? Guess I’m too dumb to understand the Narrative.

Hey Old NFO;

It is purely confiscation by imperial fiat if they could do what they want. I saw an article on a blog here in Georgia that the writer and he made some real good points. And I apologize for the long cut and paste on the comments…
*Ahem*

Polling data for her comments must not have gone over so well.

Best I can tell, Hillary Clinton hasn’t repeated her openness to gun confiscation through an Australian style gun buy back program at subsequent campaign events.

But, let’s back up and review what she said when asked about such a program at a campaign town hall about a week ago:

“By offering to buy back those guns, they were able to curtail the supply, and to set a different standard for gun purchases in the future. Now, communities have done that in our country, several communities have done gun buy back programs. But I think it would be worth considering doing it on the national level if that could be arranged. ”

Clinton seemed sure and concise as she made her comments. She didn’t strike me as speaking off-the-cuff.

As Don was reviewing Clinton’s comments near the end of last week’s Don and Doug program, it struck me that the gun buy back might well get some traction under a Clinton or some other anti-gun regime. Perhaps not on a national scale, but a federal program offering up hefty monetary grants might be used as a life-line to assist those states that overreached on gun control laws, and have thus far been unable or unwilling to forcefully bring non-compliant gun owners into compliance.

It’s estimated hundreds of thousands of residents in Connecticut and New York remain in possession of unregistered “assault weapons” or outlawed “high capacity” detachable firearm magazines. That’s way too many for a handful of cops to try kicking down doors as a means to confiscate guns now deemed illegal or subject to mandatory registration.

But if the federal government came along and offered or assisted with an optional gun buy back in states with gun laws now facing massive non-compliance, and some of the current resistors got in line to sell their guns, those states might finally be able to generate a sense that resisting gun owners have finally warmed to the states’ anti-gun legislation.

Put enough money on the table, and offer up amnesty as part of the deal, and there will be takers.

Sure, not everyone holding onto an state-declared “illegal” weapon would comply, but the number of strong hands holding guns would likely diminish if the price paid per weapon was significant, perhaps even above what market price would be in non-restricted states.

Such a ploy might give would-be gun-grabber politicians a win on a couple of levels. First and foremost, it would give anti-gun politicians and bureaucrats in Connecticut and New York a means to finally begin wresting away those guns they’ve feared going after the past two and and a half years.

Once those guns are out of circulation, otherwise law abiding “sellers” would have no means to replenish supply once present home inventories are depleted.

Secondly, if successful in New York and Connecticut (or at least successful enough for gun-grabbers to claim success), state-by-state buy backs could become a model or incentive for other states that pass tighter restrictions on gun ownership.

The addition of financial incentives to those who surrender guns might be enough to get the state-by-state gun control strategy back on the march.

I’m opposed to the kinds of restrictive gun laws passed in places like New York and Connecticut, nor am I advocating any kind of buy back confiscation scheme. I also doubt a so-called buy back would bring full compliance.

But I am attempting to assess what Hillary Clinton, and those aligned with her, might be hinting at as a means to get the gun control game back in play after suffering setbacks because of overreach a couple years back. Attempting to take anti-gun tyranny and wrapping it in a softer package with financial incentives to make confiscation appear voluntary might be the next move for the would-be gun-grabbers.

I also suspect the political left, after wins on things like Obamacare and gay marriage, may think they finally have the political clout to go after guns in new and bigger ways. I also suspect they underestimate the resolve of many American gun owners who were raised under a Bill of Rights that distinctly articulates our God given right to keep and bear arms.