This won't be popular here (I love my guns too), but that's not an accurate statement and I would hesitate to say that.
A very close and relatively recent example would be Australia's firearms reforms in 1996. Spoiler: it went fine.
Edit: because this doesn't seem clear to people here (which I expected). First, I'm NOT saying that the govt is doing the right thing and I'm NOT saying that we should do what Australia did. Second, my main point is simply that the govt CAN go through with this and it will not lead to some crazy uprising apocalyptic scenario. That's it
How is it not a violation of our rights? We lawfully acquired property, we didnt break any laws, yet the property is still be taken away from us? Its just another step at taking us away from our independence as individuals and its too bad there isn't larger protests. I agree, taking our guns away, probably won't lead to tyranny. But what the hell, it doesnt benefit public safety in any way, so why the hell are they putting so many resources into disarming us when we havent posed any threat? Of course that's going to harvest sentiment that maybe the government is planning something.
-23
u/ninnnnnja Mar 06 '26 edited Mar 06 '26
This won't be popular here (I love my guns too), but that's not an accurate statement and I would hesitate to say that.
A very close and relatively recent example would be Australia's firearms reforms in 1996. Spoiler: it went fine.
Edit: because this doesn't seem clear to people here (which I expected). First, I'm NOT saying that the govt is doing the right thing and I'm NOT saying that we should do what Australia did. Second, my main point is simply that the govt CAN go through with this and it will not lead to some crazy uprising apocalyptic scenario. That's it