Gov. Cuomo Says New York May Confiscate all Assault Weapons.

Filed under Prepper Watch   Posted by:

Leave a comment

RifleAs the calls for gun control and gun bans continue to get louder, the infamously Anti-Gun Governor of New York is making some shocking statements. In an interview with an Albany radio station, Governor Andrew Cuomo said that he’s in the process of speaking with State leaders about new gun control measures.

As part of his new Gun Control Legislation, The Governor told the reporter that “Confiscation could be an option.”

Cuomo Said: “Confiscation could be an option. Mandatory sale to the state could be an option. Permitting could be an option — keep your gun but permit it.”

New York is one of the most Anti-Gun States in America; In fact, they already have numerous gun control laws on the books which make it nearly impossible to own this class of weapon to begin with. Despite all these gun control laws, New York remains one of the most dangerous places in America, with New York City having one of the highest murder rates in America.

Cuomo says he will lay out his plans in his State of the State address on January 9th 2013.

Comments

41 Responses to " Gov. Cuomo Says New York May Confiscate all Assault Weapons. " Please share your thoughts...

  1. Bubba musftafa says:

    Can NY (or any state/feds) afford to send swat teams door to door to collect?

    • Steve Davis says:

      my thoughts. i am uncomfortable doing business with in any state that believes the forfeiture of gunfights creates more security for anyone . So hit their pocket book.. I wont do business with companies in California, New York, Massachusetts, D.C., Maryland, etc.. and thell these companies why.

      • jay bird says:

        You not doing business with Smith & Wesson MA., KAHR MA, Bushmaster NY and a few others will not help.

      • ASC says:

        The threat of gun companies leaving these states in the event of stricter laws is one of the few things that gives the pro-RKBA side leverage. Fighting regulations in these states is essential to fighting “regulation creep” in other states and at the federal level.

    • Adam says:

      They did it for Australia in 1996… you didnt hand your guns in, They sent TRG (SWAT) with the police to your door… ripped your house apart, took your guns, if you tried to show resistance, well you know what would happen..

      • Jay Are says:

        IF we allow them to take our guns, they’ll take what is left of our Freedom and the EXACT SAME THINGS that happened to the Jews and all the other people in the 20th Century who were disarmed by their government. “Fear” is our only enemy. We should be afraid of living as slaved more than we do of death itself. We are no better than those who died fighting for the freedoms we enjoy today. When that time comes, don’t pay them any less respect than they gave us over 200 years ago, or your children will Hate You ….Forever!

    • don says:

      will work like dc ban murders went 140% in dc while the nation murders dropped 2%. once you take legal guns criminals know unarmed peasents not citizens

  2. Bob says:

    I am wondering how far into their confiscations they would get before they ran out of officers?

    • The Big Dog says:

      How many officers do you think would refuse to do so? How often did NY say that they wouldn’t use registration lists to confiscate firearms later? Just goes to show you that registration ALWAYS leads to confiscation. ALWAYS. I’m betting that they’d run out of SWAT members or willing cops long before they hit 20 houses. Wouldn’t happen.

    • church says:

      L M F A O ……..DAM BOB…..I was thinking the same thing……just dam…………

      • L says:

        L M A O . . . You guys know the deal. Like to see them try upstate.

    • scooter says:

      Its not the our police or military that we should worry about but the illegally stationed UN thugs from other countries that the feds will use to go after the guns and citizens. My question is, if that happens will the citizens be willing to declare the UN troopers enemies of our sovreignty and take the necessary action to stop them by whatever means necessary?

      • rev. dave says:

        Scooter – If we’re not going to give up our guns to our own feds or local LEOs, then what would make anyone in DC think we’d give up to UN invaders without a fight?

        Oh, wait. Heavy doses of booze at night and heavy doses of prescription meds during the day. Yeah, that’ll do it, and they’re apparently all there already.

    • Varian Wrynn says:

      NYC police officers cheerfully engaged in random groping Fourth Amendment-violating searches (and still do). Will they violate your Second Amendment rights? Oh hell yeah! Actions speak louder than words.

    • jimbo says:

      Not very far. Thousands of police and military are members of Oathkeepers. We swear 10 oaths and one of them is we will not obey orders to confiscate Americans guns. Sadly some will try and many will die on both sides.

  3. Tammy says:

    LOL .. OMG! That is way too funny!! Seriously? Maybe New York City has one of the highest murder rates in America because criminals DO NOT OBEY THE LAW and with such restrictions in place, those who are NOT criminals are obeying the law and are gunless… so the criminals GUN THEM DOWN! Duh!

    • DEB says:

      hi i am a drug dealing mobster, i don’t want to be a criminal so here are my guns,,,,right.

  4. TheBgcheez says:

    They should just tell him to fug off…

  5. church says:

    OK we are going to disarm the people in this country….systematically lets begin…..first since the citizens will be disarmed the secret service men guarding the president have no need for the AR platform weapons the FBI has no need for the AR platform weapons swat has no need for them the local police has no need for them give them all single action colt revolvers and equalize the playing field once agian….and take that CCP away from that bitch pushing this shit through congress…then the people will give up they’re autoloaders…..Samuel colt allowed everyone the opportunity to be equal….the communist change the rules nuke all the foreign countrys so the rules wont change again

  6. Runner says:

    Maybe that’s a good thing. Well, not if you’re in New York. But the more extreme their gun control becomes, the higher the crime will become, and the more obvious the flaw in their thinking will be. Eventually, the lawful citizens there will have no guns (assuming those lawful citizens don’t justifiably revolt…protect yourselves, but please don’t start a war). Crime will continue to grow ever worse. The army or national guard will have to be called in to patrol the streets. Life will be awful, but they finally won’t be able to blame those pesky gun rights people since anyone that obeyed has no guns (or likely moved away). Gun control at its maximum extreme will exist and its final end will play out for the country to watch in horror. Meanwhile, states with concealed carry will continue to be safe…maybe less safe if they are near New York. That’s all pretty grim. I hope it doesn’t go down like that.

    • I suspect that when they start the confiscations there will be a war. I feel that people will resist and when resist. What do you think will happen?

      The word will get out and it’ll be on. The sad thing is that that’s what they want. Why else would they want to take the guns? Anyone with a lick of sense knows that our Constitution grants that right and it clearly says NOT TO BE INFRINGED UPON! I don’t believe that the Militia’s will allow it.

      Even China has started in on our gun control issues now. What does that tell us???

      • Runner says:

        It’s always been about control. You either have control over yourself or be controlled by someone else. Armed people can more easily tell unarmed people what to do. They probably think it’s for our own good; that they can tell us what to do a lot better than we can tell ourselves.

      • Greg says:

        verb (infringes, infringing, infringed)
        [with object]
        1actively break the terms of (a law, agreement, etc.): making an unauthorized copy would infringe copyright

        2act so as to limit or undermine (something); encroach on: such widespread surveillance could infringe personal liberties

        The definition tells me that any gun control violates the 2nd.

      • Lori says:

        I don’t understand why China thinks gunless Americans will keep them safe. UNLESS THEY’RE PLANNING TO INVADE OUR FREAKING COUNTRY!!! I pray that when push comes to shove, my high capacity magazine and I will have the strength to shove back.

  7. Judy duke says:

    When pigs fly!

  8. Robert says:

    RUN…!!!

  9. James Fletcher says:

    Sir; they are not as they are commonly known “amendments to the constitution” they are Articles of the “Bill of Rights” that was attached to the constitution before it was ratified. Any changes made after ratification are amendments. We need to correct this misperception that is portrayed. they were the original contract with the People that connot be changed or taken away

  10. James says:

    You can take my guns when you pry my cold dead fingers from around them! You are in direct violation of my Constitutional rights to think you can do this.”The right of the people to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED !

  11. James says:

    Exactly ! N.Y has some of the most restrictive gun laws in the nation, and how many criminals obey laws ?? isnt that an oxymoron or is just the Governor a Moron for nto realizing tha “Honest law abiding citizens ar not the ones that need their ability to defend themselves from a Tyranicle government taken away, by a Tyranicle Government

  12. James Fletcher says:

    “And what country can preserve its liberties, if its rulers are not warned from time to time that this people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms….The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants” (Thomas Jefferson in a letter to William S. Smith in 1787. Taken from Jefferson, On Democracy 20, S. Padover ed., 1939)

    “Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are inevitably ruined” (Patrick Henry, 3 J. Elliot, Debates in the Several State Conventions 45, 2d ed. Philadelphia, 1836)

    “The strongest reason for people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.” — (Thomas Jefferson)

    “Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the American people’s liberty teeth and keystone under independence … From the hour the Pilgrims landed, to the present day, events, occurrences, and tendencies prove that to insure peace, security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable . . . the very atmosphere of firearms everywhere restrains evil interference – they deserve a place of honor with all that is good” (George Washington)

    “A strong body makes the mind strong. As to the species of exercises, I advise the gun. While this gives moderate exercise to the body, it gives boldness, enterprise, and independence to the mind. Games played with the ball and others of that nature, are too violent for the body and stamp no character on the mind. Let your gun therefore be the constant companion of your walks. (Thomas Jefferson, Encyclopedia of T. Jefferson, 318 [Foley, Ed., reissued 1967])

    “The supposed quietude of a good mans allures the ruffian; while on the other hand, arms like laws discourage and keep the invader and the plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property. The same balance would be preserved were all the world destitute of arms, for all would be alike; but since some will not, others dare not lay them aside…Horrid mischief would ensue were one half the world deprived of the use of them…” (Thomas Paine, I Writings of Thomas Paine at 56 [1894])

    “…the people are confirmed by the next article in their right to keep and bear their private arms” (from article in the Philadelphia Federal Gazette June 18, 1789 at 2, col.2,)

    “Those, who have the command of the arms in a country are masters of the state, and have it in their power to make what revolutions they please. [Thus,] there is no end to observations on the difference between the measures likely to be pursued by a minister backed by a standing army, and those of a court awed by the fear of an armed people.” (Aristotle, as quoted by John Trenchard and Water Moyle, An Argument Shewing, That a Standing Army Is Inconsistent with a Free Government, and Absolutely Destructive to the Constitution of the English Monarchy [London, 1697])

    “No kingdom can be secured otherwise than by arming the people. The possession of arms is the distinction between a freeman and a slave. He, who has nothing, and who himself belongs to another, must be defended by him, whose property he is, and needs no arms. But he, who thinks he is his own master, and has what he can call his own, ought to have arms to defend himself, and what he possesses; else he lives precariously, and at discretion.” (James Burgh, Political Disquisitions: Or, an Enquiry into Public Errors, Defects, and Abuses [London, 1774-1775])

  13. James says:

    Some of what the fourfathers thought about Taking Guns from the people;

    “”Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation. . . Notwithstanding the military establishments in the several kingdoms of Europe, which are carried as far as the public resources will bear, the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms.” (James Madison, author of the Bill of Rights, in Federalist Paper No. 46.)

    “As civil rulers, not having their duty to the people before them, may attempt to tyrannize, and as the military forces which must be occasionally raised to defend our country, might pervert their power to the injury of their fellow citizens, the people are confirmed by the article in their right to keep and bear their private arms.” (Tench Coxe in `Remarks on the First Part of the Amendments to the Federal Constitution’ under the Pseudonym `A Pennsylvanian’ in the Philadelphia Federal Gazette, June 18, 1789 at 2 col. 1)

    “Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birthright of an American… The unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state government, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people” (Tench Coxe, Pennsylvania Gazette, Feb. 20, 1788)

    “The prohibition is general. No clause in the Constitution could by any rule of construction be conceived to give to Congress a power to disarm the people. Such a flagitious attempt could only be made under some general pretense by a state legislature. But if in any blind pursuit of inordinate power, either should attempt it, this amendment may be appealed to as a restraint on both.” [William Rawle, A View of the Constitution 125-6 (2nd ed. 1829)

    “I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for few public officials.” (George Mason, 3 Elliot, Debates at 425-426)

    “The Constitution shall never be construed….to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms” (Samuel Adams, Debates and Proceedings in the Convention of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, 86-87)

    “To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of people always possess arms, and be taught alike especially when young, how to use them.” (Richard Henry Lee, 1788, Initiator of the Declaration of Independence, and member of the first Senate, which passed the Bill of Rights, Walter Bennett, ed., Letters from the Federal Farmer to the Republican, at 21,22,124 (Univ. of Alabama Press,1975)..)

    “The great object is that every man be armed” and “everyone who is able may have a gun.” (Patrick Henry, in the Virginia Convention on the ratification of the Constitution. Debates and other Proceedings of the Convention of Virginia,…taken in shorthand by David Robertson of Petersburg, at 271, 275 2d ed. Richmond, 1805. Also 3 Elliot, Debates at 386)

    “The people are not to be disarmed of their weapons. They are left in full possession of them.” (Zachariah Johnson, 3 Elliot, Debates at 646)

    “Are we at last brought to such humiliating and debasing degradation, that we cannot be trusted with arms for our defense? Where is the difference between having our arms in possession and under our direction, and having them under the management of Congress? If our defense be the real object of having those arms, in whose hands can they be trusted with more propriety, or equal safety to us, as in our own hands?” (Patrick Henry, 3 J. Elliot, Debates in the Several State Conventions 45, 2d ed. Philadelphia, 1836)

    “The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed.” (Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist Papers at 184-8)

    “That the said Constitution shall never be construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press or the rights of conscience; or to prevent the people of The United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms…” (Samuel Adams, Debates and Proceedings in the Convention of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, at 86-87 (Peirce & Hale, eds., Boston, 1850))

  14. Come&TakeIt says:

    All good quotes, but the Courts (i.e. the Supreme Court) will base decisions primarily on precedent.

    The two most pertinent cases are US v Miller (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Miller) & DC v Heller (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/District_of_Columbia_v._Heller), with other cases cited within US v Miller.

    Both cite the 2nd Amendment to only apply to weapons common for the use by a well-regulated militia (or words to that effect). Essentially, weapons a citizen would provide from his home to rally in a community assembled militia. (Remember the 2nd Amendment was written 200 years ago & being interpreted by modern day (last 80 years) Supreme Court Justices…)

    IMO, when the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban (AWB) expired in 2004, the citizens of the country then armed ourselves with “weapons common for the use with a well-regulated militia” (those weapons just happened to be 2004 to present modern day equipment & technology) and thus the ownership/possession of such firearms IS specifically protected under the 2nd Amendment.

    Yep, the 1994 AWB was still passed into law despite the Supreme Court precedents, but maybe no one fought the law as being “Unconstitutional”? Couldn’t readily find any citations…

  15. Don yelssorC says:

    Hmmm… All my guns were stolen a few weeks ago officer. I did a police report. Why are all of you fine folks buying guns that need be registered? Buy from individuals that know no better.

  16. tony says:

    A fight is comming.

  17. The Ardent Wolf says:

    what i find funny is they expect police/military to try and confinscate said weapons, i know for a fact many of my brothers/sisters in uniform and myself will refuse to do this. i love my guns and when my niece comes of age she will learn how to use them. paranoia is only that until the truth comes out.

    • MrMiyagi says:

      Don’t be so sure when you say our military or police wouldn’t buy into this bull. Yes, on an individual level, talks with a military personnel or police would yield conversation that falls along the lines of “we would never support forced confiscation.” However, all you need to do is look at the Stanford prison experiment to understand human psychology and understand this really could happen.

      Leadership of police or military forces can create an “Us vs. Them” mentality. It essentially dehumanizes the opponent, and allows for a great divide to occur.

      Let me give you an example…An order comes through and says mandatory confiscation of firearms is necessary. The initiative starts off with some police or military following orders and a citizen (or multiple incidents of citizens) opens fire against them. This single event causes a shift in perspective of the military/police. Now “they” have opened fire against “us” and a parallel shift occurs in their thinking.

      Take a look at how many peaceful protests have turned violent in the past. All you need is a catalyst to start some pushing/shoving, and then it turns out into a brawl on both sides.

    • Spiro says:

      If you truly believe this then you are being very gullible. Do a search on YouTube.com and see how many video interviews there are about gun confiscation after huricane Katrina. A direct violation of the constitution. BUT they did it and there was no consequences for the actions that I heard of.

  18. Dave Meyer says:

    I’m thinking that Revolution might be a option.

    • rev. dave says:

      Honestly, I don’t think ‘option’ is correct. I believe it’s a certainty – and the only questions are “when?”, and which “government overreach activity is going to be the trigger?”. But I’m certain that I’ll live to see the Second American Revolution – and I’m already old.

  19. RM says:

    I agree there will be another Revolution. But I believe it will be a short one. No offense to anyone but we Americans have grown weak and comfortable with our way of life. Lots of people have lost or have never known the Patriotic love for this country. How many average Joe people do you think will stand up and lay down there life to bring this country back to its previous glory.
    Lets say two or three of the Gun Grabbin Bastards show up on your door step to take your guns. Lets say your the one thats actually follows through with what you have been preaching for years and you drop the hammmer on them. So you got the upper hand on them and now you have three dead guys on your door step. Now what? Run? Send your wife and kids to your mothers house while you stand your ground alone to surely be taken out by the second wave that will be ATF and SWAT. You may be thinking to your self, well I would die for a good cause or if that happens enough times throughout the country America would get the message. What you would get is a slot in the evening news branded a head case and a murderer that was mentally unstable and should have never been allowed to own a gun in the first place. Dont forget we are already marked as gun NUTS and thats my friends would keep the gun grab cause goin. If you want to stop the insanity then we have to assemble with the intend of force, not talking about joining the NRA, Not talking about writing your local congressman,I’m talking about letting congress know that if they dont learn there place we will throw down on them by the thousands.Assembly is the only way. Not shooting the pawns on your door step.

  20. john militello sr. says:

    “This year will go down in history,For the first time,a civilized has full gun registration,Our streets will be safer,our police more efficient,
    and the world will follow our lead into the future!”
    Adolph Hilter-1935
    The brave polish people didn’t beg for food or money,They beged for guns to defend their homeland.
    Hitler got what he had coming,our Lord will win in the end.So have faith my fellow Americans God is in
    control.

Tell us what you're thinking...