How would a federal gun ban work? House to house searches?

[Zorra]

117. Jefferson: "Sometimes it is said that man cannot be trusted with the government of himself.

Can he, then be trusted with the government of others? Or have we found angels in the form of kings to govern him? Let history answer this question."
Thomas Jefferson

It appears that history, and our ruling 1% "angels in the form of kings" have resoundingly answered his question:

47% of Congress Members Millionaires — a Status Shared by Only 1% of Americans
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/11/47-of-congress-members-millionaires-a-status-shared-by-only-1-of-americans/

Of course, the 1% are exempt from the laws under which we the people are subject. They own the lawmakers, and justice/law enforcement agencies as well. And they've made it so we basically can't do anything about it without engaging in mass, innovative, non-violent direct action.

Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission

I'm a yellowdog Democrat from birth. A radical, liberal/progressive, non-violent FDR Democrat and a peaceful Occupier. While I see valid reason for some very necessary, stringent gun control regulations, I also see many good reasons to not make these regulations too restrictive on honest, law abiding citizens. My main reason for not wanting these laws to be unreasonably restrictive is because plutarchs (the 1%) control our government. I most sincerely believe that this is an excellent reason for me to not want to see firearms regulations overly restrictive. Some will disagree, saying "oh, the tyrants are too powerful, their weapons are too powerful you can't fight them off with deer rifles, so you might as well submit to their wishes, because there is nothing you can do". Well, I prefer to make that decision for myself, thank you very much.

I want the 1% to be fully aware that we the people have hundreds of millions of firearms.

"When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty."
Thomas Jefferson



I repeat: Of course, the 1% are exempt from the laws under which we the people are subject. They own the lawmakers, and justice/law enforcement agencies as well. And they've made it so we can't do anything about it without engaging in mass, innovative, non-violent direct action.

Time for ‘Banksters’ to be prosecuted
snip---
We are five years since Wall Street’s excesses blew up the global economy, and the scandals just keep coming. Each scandal reinforces the need for tough regulation and tough enforcement. Each scandal proves over again the importance of breaking up the big banks. Each scandal raises the question of personal responsibility. How come borrowers are prosecuted for defrauding their banks, but bankers seem never to be prosecuted for defrauding their customers? George Osborne, the conservative British chancellor of the Exchequer, put it succinctly: “Fraud is a crime in ordinary business — why shouldn’t it be so in banking?” He is demanding action: “Punish wrongdoing. Right the wrong of the age of irresponsibility.”

We haven’t heard anything like that out of Washington. Libor-gate once more exposes how lax this administration has been on the banks — and how irresponsible and, frankly, craven Republicans and Mitt Romney have been on this question. Romney echoes the know-nothing Republican right’s call for repealing what little bank regulation has been passed since the financial collapse — primarily the Dodd-Frank legislation. He touts deregulation in the wake of a global economic calamity caused in large part by the misguided belief that banks can police themselves.

Not surprisingly, Romney and Republicans are raking in donations from Wall Street. But they are catering to banksters that know no shame. For example, one of the most powerful Wall Street lobbying groups is the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association, which has been leading the drive to weaken Dodd-Frank and exempt derivatives from transparency. Its chair was Jerry del Missier, the COO of Barclays, who lost his job and apparently his chairmanship in Libor-gate. Why are we not surprised?

Last January, Barclays’ hard-edged CEO Robert E. Diamond Jr. announced that it was time for bankers to get their brass back. “There was a period of remorse and apology for banks,” he declared. “I think that period is over.” More and more of the customers defrauded by bankers might agree. They are tired of fake remorse and ritual apology. That period is over. It is time for prosecutions to begin.

If we ever succeed in overturning Citizen's United, ending all lobbying of elected officials, and completely remove wealth and profit as a motivator for government policy and action, only then would I ever consider that extreme firearm regulation might be a reasonable suggestion.
☮ccupy