Hillary’s gun confiscation proposal is going to backfire in a big way

[RugersGR8]

As usual, Hillary Clinton is speaking in lib dem "double speak" and/or "psychobabble" that the leftists are so well known for when they are advancing any of their agendas.

http://hotair.com/archives/2015/10/17/hillarys-gun-confiscation-proposal-will-probably-backfire-in-a-big-way/
Hillary’s gun confiscation proposal is going to backfire in a big way
POSTED AT 8:31 AM ON OCTOBER 17, 2015 BY JAZZ SHAW

..."If you own a gun now, take heed. President Obama and now Hillary Clinton finally made clear what they’re really after – national gun confiscation."...

 

[chuter]

I think hard core Hillary supporters would probably think it's a good idea; I just hope it really does backfire on her.

 

[dennishoddy]

Ostupid couldn't get it done. Hillary won't either.

From your link, This is why.

Gun owners in Australia were forced by new law to surrender 640,381 personal firearms to be destroyed by their own government, a program costing Australia taxpayers more than $500 million dollars. The first year results:
◾Australia-wide, homicides went up 3.2 percent
◾Australia-wide, assaults went up 8.6 percent
◾Australia-wide, armed robberies went up 44 percent (yes, 44 percent)

In the state of Victoria alone, homicides with firearms are now up 300 percent. Note that while the law-abiding citizens turned them in, the criminals did not, and criminals still possess their guns.

 

[yukonjack]

I've only got one gun. It's an old RG .38 special with the brown plastic grips. I'd like to go ahead and turn it in now and get this bs over with.

 

[druryj]

I've only got one gun. It's an old RG .38 special with the brown plastic grips. I'd like to go ahead and turn it in now and get this bs over with.

Any trades considered?

 

[Super Dave]

I'll give you $5 for it.

 

[NikatKimber]

Not saying it would, but using DH's numbers above, if the ration of cost to guns removed were linear, and such a program were run here in the US, the cost would be approximately 480 TIMES what it cost in Australia (we have 310,000,000 guns as of 2009 vs 640,000 in Australia). That would be 242,000 MILLION dollars (242 billion) to destroy the privately owned guns.

 

[aarondhgraham]

She would just up our taxes,,,
To pay for buying our own guns from us.

Aarond

.

 

[toehanus]

Hahahaha. You guys think she is going to "buy" them from us! Hahaha.


www.infinityok.net

 

[tRidiot]

Not saying it would, but using DH's numbers above, if the ration of cost to guns removed were linear, and such a program were run here in the US, the cost would be approximately 480 TIMES what it cost in Australia (we have 310,000,000 guns as of 2009 vs 640,000 in Australia). That would be 242,000 MILLION dollars (242 billion) to destroy the privately owned guns.

$250 billion is a drop in the bucket in our national budget and they would borrow that from China in a SECOND if it meant getting even 50% of the legally-owned firearms out of the hands of their subjects. Jus' sayin'... after all, it ain't like it's THEIR money.