# Would you have shot the gun confiscators when they came to your door? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [April 11, 2009, 8:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-you-have-shot-the-gun-confiscators-when-they-came-to-your-door/492770 "2009-04-11T20:55:13Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 7
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2009, 5:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-you-have-shot-the-gun-confiscators-when-they-came-to-your-door/492770/121 "2009-04-13T17:54:10Z")
> [@Stealth\_Potato](#): > > The Constitution specifically allows habeas corpus to be suspended in certain situations (specifically “in cases of rebellion or invasion”), but I’m not aware of anything in the Constitution that would grant the government unlimited power under any circumstance. Would it also be legal for the government to regulate the exercise of religion or speech during a natural disaster? How about instituting a set of cruel and unusual punishments in an effort to reign in lawlessness by making a public example of a few troublemakers? In fact, the singling out of a specific exception for habeas corpus under specific emergency conditions indicates that there is no power to make any other exceptions to Constitutionally guaranteed rights on the grounds of “emergency”. See the closing section of [the Master’s discussion of “the exception proves the rule”](http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/731/whats-the-meaning-of-the-expression-thats-the-exception-that-proves-the-rule). ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2009, 5:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-you-have-shot-the-gun-confiscators-when-they-came-to-your-door/492770/122 "2009-04-13T17:55:08Z")
> [@Steve\_MB](#): > > You fail to understand the psychology of vermin. Shoot one, and watch the others soil themselves and run. And if that doesn’t work, mind terribly if I haunt you? “Woooooo! You got me killed with your dime-store pop psychology! Woooooo!” ---
**Author:** ![Una\_Persson](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/una_persson/32/346_2.png) [@Una\_Persson](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Una_Persson)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2009, 5:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-you-have-shot-the-gun-confiscators-when-they-came-to-your-door/492770/123 "2009-04-13T17:55:46Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > That wasn’t really the scenario. It was a temporary order, not a permanent law. I don’t have any problem with how you say you’d handle it, though. I think the cops would appreciate it too. Is the temporary order lawful (see below for the “unlawful” answer)? Then the only difference is I wouldn’t damage the guns, in hopes that I may pursue remedies in the court system to recover them at a later date. Thankfully a “Katrina” situation is less likely here, as last year Kansas passed a law making it illegal to seize firearms in that situation: > [@](#): > > 48-959. Seizure of firearms prohibited during official state of emergency; cause of action created; attorney fees. (a) No officer or employee of the state or any political subdivision thereof, member of the Kansas national guard in the service of the state, or any person operating pursuant to or under color of state law, receiving state funds, under control of any official of the state or political subdivision thereof, or providing services to such officer, employee or other person, while acting during a declared official state of emergency, may: > > ``` > (1) Temporarily or permanently seize, or authorize seizure of, any firearm the possession of which is not prohibited under state law, other than as evidence in a criminal investigation; or > > (2) require registration of any firearm for which registration is not required by state law. > > ``` NONETHELESS, if I go home tonight and a uniformed police officer comes to my door with no cause and no warning and no legal backing, and says “give me your guns NOW, missy”, I will stand aside and let the police take them, and then file a lawsuit to get them back. All that sound reasonable? ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2009, 6:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-you-have-shot-the-gun-confiscators-when-they-came-to-your-door/492770/124 "2009-04-13T18:01:37Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > You don’t get to decide what’s a legal order and what isn’t This is absurd, even by the standard of your main line of argument. Obviously, the doctrine that the recipient of an order may not judge its legality leads irrevocably to the conclusion that “just following orders” **is** , in fact, a valid defense for any act whatsoever. ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2009, 6:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-you-have-shot-the-gun-confiscators-when-they-came-to-your-door/492770/125 "2009-04-13T18:04:50Z")
Another careless assumption I just realized is the stipulation that the “police” are, in fact, police. This assumption breaks down often enough under ordinary circumstances (which is why it is unwise to pull over in a secluded area); under the cirumstances being discussed, it would grow weaker still. ---
**Author:** ![buttonjockey308](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/bcef8e/32.png) [@buttonjockey308](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/buttonjockey308)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2009, 6:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-you-have-shot-the-gun-confiscators-when-they-came-to-your-door/492770/126 "2009-04-13T18:09:13Z")
[Just in case…](http://www.shop.com/Humorous+Doormat+Come+Back+with+a+Warrant-48861902-63537481-p+.xhtml?sourceid=298) ---
**Author:** ![billfish678](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7bcc69/32.png) [@billfish678](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/billfish678)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2009, 7:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-you-have-shot-the-gun-confiscators-when-they-came-to-your-door/492770/127 "2009-04-13T19:00:42Z")
What I think is funny, is that the “anti-gun” people are up in arms with even this scenario. Reasons for personal gun ownership: Well regulated militia. BS apparently. Defense against gubment. More BS. Defense against aliens, either from the border or space. Pure fantasy. Home defense under normal conditions. Macho crap. When the revolution comes. Still more macho dream land BS. Defending your home and family during a major disaster with overwhelmed public services, disfunctional infrastructure, and looting and general lawlessness surrounding you. Nope, you don’t need it now either, surrender your gun. Damn, if you don’t even need a gun then, I guess never need one. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2009, 7:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-you-have-shot-the-gun-confiscators-when-they-came-to-your-door/492770/128 "2009-04-13T19:10:02Z")
> [@Steve\_MB](#): > > This is absurd, even by the standard of your main line of argument. Obviously, the doctrine that the recipient of an order may not judge its legality leads irrevocably to the conclusion that “just following orders” **is** , in fact, a valid defense for any act whatsoever. What constitutes a defense for the cops is a separate issue from what makes it ok to kill them. Even if they’re enforcing an illegal order, that doesn’t mean it’s legal to kill them. Killing the cops under this scenario is murder, full stop. It is not self-defense. It’s not the shooter’s job to be judge, jury and executioner. Of course, no one in this thread would actually do it. You’d have to be a deranged nutcase. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Krebbs](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/5fc32e/32.png) [@Mr.Krebbs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Krebbs)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2009, 7:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-you-have-shot-the-gun-confiscators-when-they-came-to-your-door/492770/129 "2009-04-13T19:11:16Z")
> [@Lumpy](#): > > Here’s the question: do you turn over your guns and hope that maybe someday, weeks months or years later the government will eventually admit it was wrong? Yes, but I would not expect those firearms back in the least. > [@](#): > > Or do you resist by deadly force, knowing that the overwhelming likelihood is that if you aren’t shot dead by a SWAT team, the state will do everything in it’s power to see you executed or spend life in prison for shooting police officers enforcing an official (if not constitutional) order? No, when there are multiple armed officers (or NG soldiers) at your door, it is never the time to fight. Let them do what they’re going to do and feel free to comment candidly on their orders, actions and personal integrity. \*\*If you’re smart, however, you’ll have already lost your irreplaceable or controversial firearms in a tragic boating accident before any sort of confiscation. \*\* Much is made of the argument that the 2nd Amendment is in our Constitution to allow citizens to fight back against a tyrannical government. If this were to happen nowadays, there would be times for revolutionaries to be combatants but much more often, it would be necessary for revolutionaries to be unarmed civilians. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2009, 7:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-you-have-shot-the-gun-confiscators-when-they-came-to-your-door/492770/130 "2009-04-13T19:13:47Z")
> [@Steve\_MB](#): > > You fail to understand the psychology of vermin. Shoot one, and watch the others soil themselves and run. “Vermin?” I think you’ve seen too many _Death Wish_ movies. It doesn’t work that way in real life. Especially when the bad guys all have guns too. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2009, 7:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-you-have-shot-the-gun-confiscators-when-they-came-to-your-door/492770/131 "2009-04-13T19:16:12Z")
> [@Una\_Persson](#): > > Is the temporary order lawful (see below for the “unlawful” answer)? Then the only difference is I wouldn’t damage the guns, in hopes that I may pursue remedies in the court system to recover them at a later date. > > Thankfully a “Katrina” situation is less likely here, as last year Kansas passed a law making it illegal to seize firearms in that situation: > > NONETHELESS, if I go home tonight and a uniformed police officer comes to my door with no cause and no warning and no legal backing, and says “give me your guns NOW, missy”, I will stand aside and let the police take them, and then file a lawsuit to get them back. > > All that sound reasonable? Anything short of murdering cops is reasonable to me. Refusing to turn over the guns and asking to be arrested instead is also reasonable. I’m just saying fight the law, not the innocent LE personnel enforcing it. ---
**Author:** ![LH75](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lh75/32/4438_2.png) [@LH75](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LH75)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2009, 7:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-you-have-shot-the-gun-confiscators-when-they-came-to-your-door/492770/132 "2009-04-13T19:26:42Z")
> [@](#): > > Originally Posted by Una Persson View Post > The rest of you? > > If a law was passed outlawing my firearms and allowing house-to-house confiscation, I would greet the police at the door saying “all of my firearms are in that pile to the left. I have bent the barrels and cut the receivers in half (being very careful not to obscure or damage the serial numbers) and broken the magazines - just in case one of the weapons goes ‘mysteriously missing’ from your evidence locker. The ammunition for them is in the pile to the right, you’ll notice that in each case the cartridges have been smashed - you know, just in case they were to go ‘missing’ from your evidence locker as well. The woman standing next to me is my attorney, and the person with the video camera is her assistant. Would you like some coffee? All I have is instant.” > > Look out everyone, I guess I’m one of those craaaaaaaaaaaaazy SDMB gun nuts. And once again, the voice of reason is posted on the SMDB. Thanks, friend **Una** ---
**Author:** ![Scumpup](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ce73a5/32.png) [@Scumpup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scumpup)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2009, 7:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-you-have-shot-the-gun-confiscators-when-they-came-to-your-door/492770/133 "2009-04-13T19:34:29Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > Of course, no one in this thread would actually do it. You’d have to be a deranged nutcase. Why don’t you knock off claiming you know what anybody else will do? ---
**Author:** ![Stealth\_Potato](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/d78d45/32.png) [@Stealth\_Potato](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stealth_Potato)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2009, 7:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-you-have-shot-the-gun-confiscators-when-they-came-to-your-door/492770/134 "2009-04-13T19:35:35Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > What constitutes a defense for the cops is a separate issue from what makes it ok to kill them. Even if they’re enforcing an illegal order, that doesn’t mean it’s legal to kill them. Killing the cops under this scenario is murder, full stop. It is not self-defense. It’s not the shooter’s job to be judge, jury and executioner. What if it weren’t the police but a band of looters trying to disarm you? Clearly resisting with force would be self-defense in that case. So, from where exactly do the police officers derive their protection? And consider that this isn’t an ordinary situation where the only harm to you is being deprived of your guns: it’s a chaotic, lawless situation in which (in some cases) even the police are joining the ranks of the looters. Being able to defend yourself from a roving pack of lawless thugs might just mean the difference between life and death. Suppose they weren’t just confiscating your guns but your food and water also. Would it still be murder to resist? Saying that you should just let them do as they please and then take it up through the appropriate legal channels is all well and good while civilization still stands, and indeed I agree that you’d have to be completely insane to do anything else under normal circumstances. But in the aftermath of a catastrophe, when society breaks down and even the police abandon the law? I’m not so sure. ---
**Author:** ![ToeJam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/dfb087/32.png) [@ToeJam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ToeJam)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2009, 7:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-you-have-shot-the-gun-confiscators-when-they-came-to-your-door/492770/135 "2009-04-13T19:47:00Z")
> [@Stealth\_Potato](#): > > Saying that you should just let them do as they please and then take it up through the appropriate legal channels is all well and good while civilization still stands, and indeed I agree that you’d have to be completely insane to do anything else under normal circumstances. **But in the aftermath of a catastrophe, when society breaks down and even the police abandon the law?** I’m not so sure. I’d turn on the Bat signal at that point. ---
**Author:** ![billfish678](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7bcc69/32.png) [@billfish678](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/billfish678)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2009, 7:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-you-have-shot-the-gun-confiscators-when-they-came-to-your-door/492770/136 "2009-04-13T19:57:43Z")
> [@Ro0sh](#): > > I’d turn on the Bat signal at that point. It won’t work. You’ll get the George Clooney version. Or at least I hope the Cynic gets the Clooney version. ---
**Author:** ![Sophistry\_and\_Illusion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b3f665/32.png) [@Sophistry\_and\_Illusion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sophistry_and_Illusion)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2009, 8:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-you-have-shot-the-gun-confiscators-when-they-came-to-your-door/492770/137 "2009-04-13T20:02:58Z")
> [@billfish678](#): > > Defending your home and family during a major disaster with overwhelmed public services, disfunctional infrastructure, and looting and general lawlessness surrounding you. > > Nope, you don’t need it now either, surrender your gun. > > Damn, if you don’t even need a gun then, I guess never need one. > [@Stealth\_Potato](#): > > What if it weren’t the police but a band of looters trying to disarm you? Clearly resisting with force would be self-defense in that case. So, from where exactly do the police officers derive their protection? > > And consider that this isn’t an ordinary situation where the only harm to you is being deprived of your guns: it’s a chaotic, lawless situation in which (in some cases) even the police are joining the ranks of the looters. Being able to defend yourself from a roving pack of lawless thugs might just mean the difference between life and death. Suppose they weren’t just confiscating your guns but your food and water also. Would it still be murder to resist? > > Saying that you should just let them do as they please and then take it up through the appropriate legal channels is all well and good while civilization still stands, and indeed I agree that you’d have to be completely insane to do anything else under normal circumstances. But in the aftermath of a catastrophe, when society breaks down and even the police abandon the law? I’m not so sure. Both of these quotes seem to say you need your guns for self-defense. But of course engaging the police in a shootout has a much higher chance of killing you than facing a post-Katrina New Orleans sans firearms, so the self-defense argument is entirely spurious. I mean, it’s obvious that if you really care about maximizing your chances of survival, you won’t try to shoot the cops; this whole line of reasoning is just a red herring. So if it’s not about self-defense, what is it about? It seems like these gun arguments bring out the machismo in people. I seriously doubt that we would see this kind of swaggering in a thread about the police going around confiscating copies of the Tin Drum or something like that. I mean, seriously. “Any jack-booted thug who comes for my Günter Grass is going to eat hot lead!” Things would clearly be different if there were an on-going, serious and nation-wide suppression of free-speech, but a local event, where you knew that the effort would be limited in time and later you would be able to buy another copy of whatever books were taken? That’s what New Orleans was: everybody sane knew that they would be able to get more guns later, or go somewhere else where guns were available. If you think killing people is necessary in this situation, your violence threshold is way too low. ---
**Author:** ![LH75](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lh75/32/4438_2.png) [@LH75](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LH75)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2009, 8:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-you-have-shot-the-gun-confiscators-when-they-came-to-your-door/492770/138 "2009-04-13T20:09:00Z")
I am a gun owner, and probably more liberal than the average gun owner here at the SDMB. My point of view is that suicide by cop is a foolish option in this set of circumstances. I have heard from the gun lobby and the second amendment crown the phrase: “I’ll give up my gun when they pry it from my cold, dead hand!” Defending your second amendment rights by pointing your weapon at a group of armed law enforcement officers coming to confiscate your firearms, whatever the legality of the confiscation order, certainly has the likelihood of the “cold, dead hand” scenario coming to pass. ---
**Author:** ![billfish678](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7bcc69/32.png) [@billfish678](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/billfish678)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2009, 8:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-you-have-shot-the-gun-confiscators-when-they-came-to-your-door/492770/139 "2009-04-13T20:16:56Z")
> [@Sophistry\_and\_Illusion](#): > > Both of these quotes seem to say you need your guns for self-defense. But of course engaging the police in a shootout has a much higher chance of killing you than facing a post-Katrina New Orleans sans firearms, so the self-defense argument is entirely spurious. I mean, it’s obvious that if you really care about maximizing your chances of survival, you won’t try to shoot the cops; this whole line of reasoning is just a red herring. > > . Dude, You might need them LATER. You bluff, hoping against hope that THE COPS will come to their senses before they force your hand. Then of course NOBODY ever stands up for their rights (to their own detriment) so that OTHERS may benifit. I know I sure as hell wouldn’t stand for attack dogs, tear gas, and water hoses so some other guy would be allowed to sit in front of the bus…much less so he or she can protect their family and property from criminals in trying times. Shocking as it may seem, some people have a moral compass that actually includes the bigger picture sometimes, rather than thier own precious hide. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2009, 8:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-you-have-shot-the-gun-confiscators-when-they-came-to-your-door/492770/140 "2009-04-13T20:19:29Z")
If you try shooting it out with the cops, there isn’t going to _be_ any later. And “moral compass?” Please people with a moral compass don’t murder cops. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-you-have-shot-the-gun-confiscators-when-they-came-to-your-door/492770.md?page=6) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-you-have-shot-the-gun-confiscators-when-they-came-to-your-door/492770.md?page=8)