Quote:
Originally Posted by u crank
I'm going to suggest that it won't be done like that. That doesn't mean it won't be done.
Here in Canada for example smoking cigarettes is practically outlawed. You can smoke but the Government has made it very hard and embarrassing if you do. Tobacco products cannot be displayed in stores, pharmacies cannot sell tobacco products, you can't smoke near the entrance of a public building, in a restaurant or bar etc. These draconian measures (if you're a smoker) did not happen over night. It took a while and there was lots of push back. And the Gov't is not done. None of it would have happened if it was attempted all at once.
And that in my opinion would be the plan if you want to do anything similar. Small steps over a long period of time.
|
Huge (or, if you prefer, "Yuuuge!!") difference is the rigt to bear arms is in the US Constitution and any actual effort to fully implement a full confiscation would be a Federal criminal act and even an attempt to do a "dirbs and drabs" approach would be so time consuming, expensive and telegraphed as to be useless; the court challenges as the 'process' played out alone would tie up every thing for so long the sun would probably extinguish before all the guns were collected. And any thought of an abolishing of the 2nd Amendment is a non-starter: the 2nd is part of the Bill Of Rights, a vital portion of the Constitution so sacrosanct as to be beyond touch...
Now, I am basing this on the presumption cigarette smoking is not guaranteed by the Canadian Constitution as a specific fundamental right, but I could be wrong: Canadians are such strange creatures...
...polite, yet strange...
<O>