Even CNN says confiscation is not legally possible - probably

Even CNN says confiscation is not legally possible - probably

This is a discussion on Even CNN says confiscation is not legally possible - probably within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; CNN, which is no friend to the RTKABA did a fact check on Beto's plan to confiscate AKs and ARs and said confiscation will probably ...

Results 1 to 7 of 7
Like Tree11Likes
  • 2 Post By jmf552
  • 4 Post By Mike1956
  • 2 Post By Chaplain Scott
  • 3 Post By Nmuskier

Thread: Even CNN says confiscation is not legally possible - probably

  1. #1
    VIP Member Array jmf552's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    6,261

    Even CNN says confiscation is not legally possible - probably

    CNN, which is no friend to the RTKABA did a fact check on Beto's plan to confiscate AKs and ARs and said confiscation will probably not fly legally. The Heller decision green-lit "guns that are in common use." The estimate is that there are 8.5 to 15 million "assault weapons" out there, depending on how they are defined. That is clearly "common use." So CNN's fact check conclusion is that 1) No president could do it unilaterally through regulation, like was done with bump stocks. And 2) While a ban on manufacturing and sale would be legal, confiscation, even with compensation, would not.

    I think it is significant that a liberal outlet like CNN is admitting this. Also, they didn't even address the immense logistics required to confiscate, and the possibility of armed resistance to confiscation. Even Megan McCain, on The View, of all places, predicted armed resistance to gun confiscation. And no, I did not watch The View, even a clip of it, nor would I. I read about Ms. McCain's remarks in other reports.

    https://www.cnn.com/2019/09/14/polit...eck/index.html
    Chaplain Scott and Texron like this.
    Attack Squadron 65 "Tigers", USS Eisenhower '80 - '83, peackeeping w/Iran, Libya, Lebanon and E. Europe

  2. #2
    VIP Member
    Array Mike1956's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Marion county, Ohio
    Posts
    32,721
    And then there are the difficulties presented on the purely practical side. How do you disarm millions of people who have no intentions of cooperating with you?
    "Stop being dangerous, and you become edible." William Aprill

    "Slaves, enjoy your freedom." Chuck Klosterman

  3. #3
    VIP Member Array Chaplain Scott's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Montana
    Posts
    2,703
    But....this doesn't stop the masses of progressive sheep, who drink long and deeply at the fountain of Democratic Leftist ideology from fearing and HATING gun owners. This HATE will drive them to do ALL THEY CAN to disarm us.
    G26Raven and msgt/ret like this.
    Scott, US Army 1974-2004

    Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on or one day we will spend our sunset years telling our children what it was once like in the United States where men were free.
    - Ronald Reagan

  4. Remove Advertisements
    DefensiveCarry.com
    Advertisements
     

  5. #4
    Distinguished Member Array NECCdude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Nebraska
    Posts
    1,728
    How does one define "in common use"? To me, 500,000 bump stocks is common use. Besides, how can a weapon become "in common use" if it's banned? I don't know how many full auto weapons are in private ownership but I would imagine that there's enough to classify them as "in common use" and yet we (us low-life civilians) can't purchase a newly manufactured full auto weapon.
    Member NRA, SAF, GOA, NFOA, USCCA

    Microwave radio technicians are fully deviated.

  6. #5
    VIP Member Array Nmuskier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Upper Michigan
    Posts
    5,056
    I think this has more to do with CNN putting their finger on the scale. They support Warren and Harris. They do not want Francis taking up their air time anymore. He served their purpose, now they are ready to dispose of him.
    G26Raven, Bikenut and Doghandler like this.
    Psalm 144:1

  7. #6
    VIP Member Array Doghandler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    West Branch
    Posts
    6,073
    "And 2) While a ban on manufacturing and sale would be legal, confiscation, even with compensation, would not."

    I'm sure we'll see this tested sooner or later. We already see it to some degree now in some states whereby bans on possession effectively ban the market in those areas.

    My bet is that we'll be seeing more push for onerous, NFA style regulation. The press and politicians are still trying to figure out how this all works.
    There is a solution but we are not Jedi... not yet.
    Doghandler
    We have deep thinkers and stinkers in this group that could come up with a solution...
    welder516
    Buck the donkey

  8. #7
    Distinguished Member
    Array 1942bull's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Location
    SE PA
    Posts
    1,995
    @jmf552 , Heller did not green light guns in common use. It said that weapon more suitable for military use can be regulated unless they are in common use. That gives rise to 2 questions: 1.How do you quantity "common use?"
    2. If assault rifles are in "common use" then why are state bans on them surviving appeal, and why I SOTUS not reviewing this appeals court decisions?

    The more significant argument against a mandatory buy-back is that it would have to survive a 4th Amendment challenge that such action or law would violate the principle of unwarranted search and seizure. Even if Congress passed buy-back law it would have to survive a constitutionalists challenge, and executive order would be enjoins by a federal court within hours of being signed.

    Since the the civilian model of the M16 nd AK families of rifles are offshoots of rilles in "military use" they are subject to regulation unless the court finds them to be 'in common use". However, regulation and confiscation are ver different. Confiscation cannot be justified by quantity used. A seizure warrant must be specific nor collective. I just do not see a confiscation or buy back of assault rifles. I do see a ban coming unless the opponents present a cogent argument base upon statistical evidence that assault rifles kill the smallest percentage of civilan firearm deaths among all guns. A proper statistical case would sho that the ban advocates are making an appeal based upon emotional reaction not facts.
    "You don't hurt them if you don't hit them." Lt. Gen. Lewis "Chesty" Puller, USMC Retired

    USMC 9/59 through 9/69
    Vietnam June 66 to February 68
    MOS: 4641, Combat Photographer

    Memberships:
    Gun Owners of America
    Second Amendment Foundation
    Pennsylvania Firearms Owners Against Crime

Sponsored Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •