http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/07119/781629-374.stm
I almost couldn’t help but laughing…but then I realized he was serious.
"Special squads of police would be formed and trained to carry out the work. Then, on a random basis to permit no advance warning, city blocks and stretches of suburban and rural areas would be cordoned off and searches carried out in every business, dwelling and empty building. Thoroughness would be at the level of the sort of search that is carried out in Crime Scene Investigations. All firearms would be seized. "
Ironically, he’s using America’s free press to disseminate this stuff.
Sickening.
I emailed this response to the author:
Mr. Simpson,
I disagree with your ideas about taking away rightfully owned firearms from law abiding Americans.
To quote your article from the April 29th edition of the Pittsburgh Post Gazette.
“What was clear at Virginia Tech is that at least two of those guns were in the wrong hands.” This statement is correct and the state of Virgina has taken action to correct this situation.
However, for that mistake by the state of Virginia you desire to take away my constitutional right to “keep and bear arms.”
As you also said I consider you “a crazed liberal zealot wanting to take the gun from [my] cold, dead hands…”
I am sorry sir that you, who should have an outstanding grasp of what makes this country truly unique in the world and the envy of individuals from all other nations, are so profoundly ignorant of why this country is so very great. That we as citizens have rights that are not granted to us but which are recognized by our constitution including freedom of the press and the right to keep and bear arms.
One day the second amendment may be all that is left to preserve the first. On that day I will do what ever is necessary to protect your right to write such ignorant fare as was published on April 29, 2007.
Kind of interesting idea for tactics…
To the best of my knowledge this is the type of tactic used by Mexico’s finest (boys in blue) when they take down a bank. :eek:
Maybe that dumb SOB would like to live under MARTIAL LAW! Hvae his food, gas and other necessities rationed. He should also work for 5 dollars a week and have to sell one or two of his children since there isnt enough room in his hut.
There are profound errors in his reasoning. The cost to create the sort of police force, search cordons, disruption to traffic and commerce, etc. would cost far in excess of the “slack” in our economy.
Tax revenues, due to slowed economic activity, would drop and bankrupt the governments trying to pay for the searches. Secondly, any reasonable manager would have move the cordons around slowly and search in a grid pattern or similar method. Knowing this, people would also react reasonably, moving their weapons to their uncles or friends place outside the search cordon and back inside after the search cordon was lifted. This is the same thing that people selling drugs do, hide the drugs from police and move them when police approach.
Basically, he would bankrupt the country to remove an item that kills less people than highway accidents (IIRC) and maybe at best scoop up 20% of the guns. That’s just a guess but someone who know statistics on other contraband items could give you a good number.
After a decade or two they might winnow that down, but you’ve also now created a huge incentive for gun smuggling across both of our open borders. Does anyone remember prohibition? Not a bad example of what would happen. The lack of domestic market would certainly shut down our domestic arms makers. The resulting market vaccuum would be filled by wildly over-priced weapons for the police and military - you think an H&K is expensive now think what they’ll charge the PD when they don’t have Rugers to contend with.
The jump in cost for arms would reduce the funds available for hiring and training. Since there would be less enforcement, the violators would go unhindered by police activity in a large percentage of the jurisdictions.
Lastly, this would make every cop or soldier who happened to be armed inside the US a target for murder. Knowing that an illegal gun is obtainable from the officer/soldier, criminals would certainly try to kill them in order to obtain them. Human nature won’t change to make a columnist happy.
Why are childish people given jobs writing for newspapers anyway?
M_P
America’s long land and sea borders present another kind of problem. It is easy to imagine mega-gun dealerships installing themselves in Mexico and perhaps in more remote parts of the Canadian border area to funnel guns into the United States. That would constitute a problem for American immigration authorities and the U.S. Coast Guard…
Understatement of the year… There’s so many drugs in this country that drug related violence has gone down because the price has dropped to the point where it’s not worth it to off your rivals like it was in the 80’s. We couldn’t stop that with the war on drugs, how would we even begin to stop the flow of guns if they were banned?
He’s most likely a self proclaimed intellectual that hasn’t realized (or thought out) what such an idea could lead to, most specifically being a subject and not a citizen on equal footing with his peers…
To him it just feels like the best thing to do.
Wow, just wow:(
“Those who would trade liberty for security shall soon have neither…”
Benjamin Franklin
Hey, Mr. Simpson… Good luck with that.
MOLOHN LAVEH!
To the best of my knowledge this is the type of tactic used by…
…the Nazi’s in WWII. So how did the Jewish citizens do after that? 
Mace
I believe they tried this in the Warsaw ghetto (to include a 10’ wall around the area), and were quite embarrassed by the initial results. Only shear strength in numbers, tanks, etc. could prevail in such a situation.
http://www.historyplace.com/worldwar2/timeline/warsaw.htm
These people knew what it meant and what it was all about.
no no that idea is great…after the highly efficient gun seizing police teams “rob” america, then maybe we can send them to do more highly efficient work in the middle east and remove all terrorists and their guns
I would only suggest that they start in West Virginia, Tennessee, Kentucky, Alabama, Mississippi and the like to see how that plan works out for them with all those good ole Scots-Irish background folks. I think the casualty figures of the gun grabbers would get intolerable pretty quick…
I sometimes wonder how many would really take up arms.
If it’s in small doses, most Americans won’t know where the guns went.
Sort of like what happened to the last tree on Easter Island. Most of the islanders hadn’t seen trees in their entire lives at that point so none really thought it was wrong with cutting down the last one.
All out prohibition rarely works, what you need to do to eliminate something is a campaign with really long term goals and millions of short term goals. Gun free zones, banning “banana clips,” banning “assault weapons.”
Now if there were a overnight ban on all guns, in my opinion there would be a revolt.
You know… I think your onto something there. 
Once Free Speach goes, then they can work on our Arms… In that order… But I am sure that our arms will protect free speach…