Feinstein & Cuomo Admit Planning Australian Style Government Gun Buy Back

Believe it or not ...Not sure if anyone reported this here yet (If so, please delete)

Feinstein & Cuomo Admit Planning Australian Style Government Gun Buy Back

http://www.infowars.com/feinstein-cu...-gun-buy-back/


Dan Roberts
ammoland.com
December 26, 2012

News that a mandatory, government sponsored gun buy back scheme is in the planning stages emerged last Friday.

Friday is well known as the day of the week in the news cycle to release information or statements that is unusually controversial or ” bad news” , the theory being that the general public will be so distracted by the upcoming weekend that they will pay little if any attention.

Exploiting this common practice, word emerged at the end of last week that Congresswoman Dianne Feinstein and NY State Gov Andrew Cuomo are actively working on a planned govt fiat to seize lawfully owned private property without cause. In the form of an Australian style MANDATORY firearms buy back program, going so far as to tout that Countries program and so called positive results, while conveniently omitting the fact that Australia’s violent crime rate dramatically increased in the wake of the scheme and continues unabated.

While details are scant in both Feinstein’s and Cuomo’s press release on the plan, Cuomo was quoted as making it clear that the buyback would be compulsory and participation mandatory. Although it remains a question what the penalties for non compliance would be. Cuomo further added that they would make gun owners “an offer they can’t refuse” when referring to buyback amounts of up to 500 dollars.
...

See this for the rest.

I won't believe this until there are more reports on this - this idea is too radical. But if this is true, it is actually good news because it's DOA.

Are some guns really worth FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS?! -who wouldn't jump at the chance to sell a gun for that much money?!?!

That will be amusing, and will never make it out of the house, and hopefully will cost her and anyone who sponsors it their jobs.

We have a Constitution.
Australia didn't, at least not a 2cnd.

Who the hell is gonna pay for it?
The fiscal cliff looms.

Besides, "Infowars" seems at times to have the credibility of the "Onion".

I think the words we're looking for are "Come and take it"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rooskibar03

I think the words we're looking for are "MOLON LABE, BITCH"

---

I FIFY

[blah-blah]

They're starting high hoping to negotiate down to a re-run of the 94 AWB only without a sunset.

Also I'll be more impressed when I read this news on a site that doesn't also have crap about the Illuminati Reptilian Alien Zionist conspiracy to pollute our precious bodily fluids.

Very skeptical, but if it were true it would be great news. No way this would ever pass. It would bring all other legislation down with it.

I can't stand Diane Fecalstein

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by R&S

I can't stand Diane Fecalstein

---

Was that really necessary? Oh well, we'll overlook it just this one time.

There's one sure way to start a revolution.

This will NEVER happen. "Buy back" or whatever you want to call it, seizing firearms will NEVER happen here. As stated above. It will start a revolution...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AR_ART

This will NEVER happen. "Buy back" or whatever you want to call it, seizing firearms will NEVER happen here. As stated above. It will start a revolution...

---

Have we stopped to consider that this may be exactly what they want??

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BPTactical

Have we stopped to consider that this may be exactly what they want??

---

americans are really good at war and we are really good at it with each other , why would they want that ? [pick-me]

why do you think there are NATO troops in the US? American troops wouldn't fire on americans execising their rights but NATO troops would.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AR_ART

This will NEVER happen. "Buy back" or whatever you want to call it, seizing firearms will NEVER happen here. As stated above. It will start a revolution...

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by alxone

americans are really good at war and we are really good at it with each other , why would they want that ? [pick-me]

---

If I was going to indulge the idea, and wager a guess... the U.N. The United States is too important to the world theater so NATO forces would be used to quell any uprising by the people and allow for an adjustment of the "antiquated" document that allowed this to happen in the first place. Welcome to the previously mythical new world order.

All of that said, I doubt they want that, but then again I don't think they have any clue what the real America looks like right now, or how precarious the position of the country has actually become. Then again if I had a paycheck for life, and the best health plan in the country and wasn't paying for it, I might be a little disconnected myself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by R&S

why do you think there are NATO troops in the US? American troops wouldn't fire on americans execising their rights but NATO troops would.

---

Except that the instant a platoon of blue helmets is put out on American streets for any purpose other than a parade, large portions of the US military will take up arms against the Fed.Gov. There are a lot more Oath Keepers in the US military than you'd ever believe. That's why I always find talk of NATO or UN troops being used on US soil to be silly.

Any talk of confiscation, mass buyback or moving semi auto arms to NFA are just their "throwaways" (in every negotiation one brings to the table some "throwaways" that you don't mind giving up in faux compromise so you get exactly what you want).

infowars = fail.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hatidua

Are some guns really worth FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS?! -who wouldn't jump at the chance to sell a gun for that much money?!?!

---

Time for me to go out and buy 100 Jiminez arms 22lr pistols, and I guess I'll throw in some High Points too, just for good measure! Gotta make SOME money off this shit since all of my guns cost over $500.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BPTactical

Besides, "Infowars" seems at times to have the credibility of the "Onion".

---

I was gonna say something about that... I vote the op gets 5 lashes for posting an "Infowars" link! [ROFL1]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BPTactical

Besides, "Infowars" seems at times to have the credibility of the "Onion".

---

Infowars actually has as much credibility as the Boulder Daily Camera. That is to say, several steps behind the Onion and Duffelblog...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hatidua

Are some guns really worth FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS?! -who wouldn't jump at the chance to sell a gun for that much money?!?!

---

Geez 90 percent of the firearms most people own are worth more than 500 each. What a freaking joke. Shows just how much these clowns know.

Here is what she is going to propose:

http://www.feinstein.senate.gov/publ...ssault-weapons

Summary of 2013 legislation


Following is a summary of the 2013 legislation:

• Bans the sale, transfer, importation, or manufacturing of:
  
  • 120 specifically-named firearms
  • Certain other semiautomatic rifles, handguns, shotguns that can accept a detachable magazine and have one military characteristic
  • Semiautomatic rifles and handguns with a fixed magazine that can accept more than 10 rounds
  
  
• Strengthens the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban and various state bans by:
  
  • Moving from a 2-characteristic test to a 1-characteristic test
  • Eliminating the easy-to-remove bayonet mounts and flash suppressors from the characteristics test
  • Banning firearms with “thumbhole stocks” and “bullet buttons” to address attempts to “work around” prior bans
  
  
• Bans large-capacity ammunition feeding devices capable of accepting more than 10 rounds.
• Protects legitimate hunters and the rights of existing gun owners by:
  
  • Grandfathering weapons legally possessed on the date of enactment
  • Exempting over 900 specifically-named weapons used for hunting or sporting purposes and
  • Exempting antique, manually-operated, and permanently disabled weapons
  
  
• Requires that grandfathered weapons be registered under the National Firearms Act, to include:
  
  • Background check of owner and any transferee;
  • Type and serial number of the firearm;
  • Positive identification, including photograph and fingerprint;
  • Certification from local law enforcement of identity and that possession would not violate State or local law; and
  • Dedicated funding for ATF to implement registration

A pdf of the bill summary is available here.

my bad--didn't realize there were two similar posts

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zundfolge

Except that the instant a platoon of blue helmets is put out on American streets for any purpose other than a parade, large portions of the US military will take up arms against the Fed.Gov. There are a lot more Oath Keepers in the US military than you'd ever believe. That's why I always find talk of NATO or UN troops being used on US soil to be silly.

---

I agree. Also just curious. Does anyone have realistic numbers of UN troops actually in this country? And where they are located? I just cannot believe the US military would stand by and allow UN troops to police our country.

looks like they're trying for the second, fourth, and fifth all at once.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sroz

I agree. Also just curious. Does anyone have realistic numbers of UN troops actually in this country? And where they are located? I just cannot believe the US military would stand by and allow UN troops to police our country.

---

UN "Peacekeepers" as they call their troops, are contributed by UN Member Nation's military forces. The United States currently has no troops contributed to the UN force. The countries that contribute to the blue helmets are: Canada, Brazil, Italy, Nigeria, Rwanda, India, Jordan, Japan, Cambodia, Singapore, and Australia. If they ever did deploy UN troops on our soil in any capacity I foresee a lot of "holy" blue helmets...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eadgbe194

looks like they're trying for the second, fourth, and fifth all at once.

---

Add the Sixth as well...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ronin13

UN "Peacekeepers" as they call their troops, are contributed by UN Member Nation's military forces. The United States currently has no troops contributed to the UN force. The countries that contribute to the blue helmets are: Canada, Brazil, Italy, Nigeria, Rwanda, India, Jordan, Japan, Cambodia, Singapore, and Australia. If they ever did deploy UN troops on our soil in any capacity I foresee a lot of "holy" blue helmets...

---

I see what you did there!

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_IWq3Uc-_C1...lmet-small.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ronin13

UN "Peacekeepers" as they call their troops, are contributed by UN Member Nation's military forces. The United States currently has no troops contributed to the UN force. The countries that contribute to the blue helmets are: Canada, Brazil, Italy, Nigeria, Rwanda, India, Jordan, Japan, Cambodia, Singapore, and Australia. If they ever did deploy UN troops on our soil in any capacity I foresee a lot of "holy" blue helmets...

---

So, how many are in country?

they are not going to use the UN here. They are going to use your local PD and SO. Who will be "just doing their job"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HBARleatherneck

they are not going to use the UN here. They are going to use your local PD and SO. Who will be "just doing their job"

---

FWIW
Every LE I have spoken with regarding this subject has stated the same thing: "That is the day the badge gets turned in"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BPTactical

FWIW
Every LE I have spoken with regarding this subject has stated the same thing: "That is the day the badge gets turned in"

---

There's plenty that will, but for every cop that resigns over this crap at least 5 will stay on the job and use the "just following orders" excuse (and at least two of those five can't wait to start kicking in doors and teaching us "civilians" who's boss).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 22cal

So, how many are in country?

---

Here? None... Blue Helmets don't get deployed to places that don't have extreme turmoil, we're not there... yet. [Peep]
Teufelhund- you like that? [Coffee]
Bert- Same with all my LE friends... I don't think we'll have our own LE and Mil turning against the population... it could turn into a very sticky situation if things go sour, and I'll be willing to bet if it ever got that far it would get very dark here very fast.

delete

Do you really think he would try to use our own military against us? There is a reason he is dismantling the armed forces, especially the Army.

Look who he is affiliated with, look who he favors/funds/arms.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zundfolge

There's plenty that will, but for every cop that resigns over this crap at least 5 will stay on the job and use the "just following orders" excuse (and at least two of those five can't wait to start kicking in doors and teaching us "civilians" who's boss).

---

I suspect that will go badly for them, and will polarize the rest of the country pretty fast. Not to mention we will most likely get to see that moment of clarity sweep across a reporter's face when they see what is happening. "Today they come for me, tomorrow they come for you"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NMB2

Do you really think he would try to use our own military against us? There is a reason he is dismantling the armed forces, especially the Army.

Look who he is affiliated with, look who he favors/funds/arms.

---

If things go sideways, I'm not betting on anything or anyone. There are cops that will likely refuse the order and there are ones that will relish kicking your door in. Not all cops are conservatives nor are they all pro-2A.

Remember what the National Guard did after Hurricane Katrina. Mayor Nagin said no one will be able to possess a firearm and the Guard and police went into homes and confiscated them.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-taU9d26wT4