The Australian example

[VegasGeorge]

So you're saying VagasGeorge that if they come for the guns and ammo they'll get the ammo first. If enough gun owners did that it were certainly slow down confiscation. They'd find out that confiscation had consequences, Unintended Consequences (anyone read the book?)

Well, it would be stupid and suicidal for gun owners to simply wait until the knock came at their particular door, then shoot it out with the authorities. I would hope that many large groups of resistance fighters would form, and would offer sufficient resistance in their local areas to dissuade authorities from enforcing the confiscatory laws. If thousands banded together and refused to give up, there isn't much the government could do about it. That would be particularly true if the local national guard were on our side. And, I see that as a very real possibility.

[Bear Poop]

EXACTLY!!!!!!!!!!!!

Fight back or rollover!! I am for fighting back

[In10city]

I'm with you VegasGeorge!

[junglebob]

I've seen this sentiment express many time before. And surely, it is an understandable reaction. But, what does that lead to? What element of freedom is left? What honor is there in defying an unconstitutional law by lying and pretending to comply?

Sure, if guns are banned I can claim mine were stolen, and hide them somewhere. But from that day on I would be afraid of being caught with them. I couldn't show them off, or even admit I had them. I couldn't participate in a forum like this one. I couldn't practice with them. I couldn't carry them without risking prison. They would be totally useless, and a liability to me. Why would I be keeping them?

If I wasn't up for using them to defend my right to have them in the first place, when would I use them?

Can't carry them without risking prison, sounds like Illinois. You can own them, show them off, admit you have them, and practice with them, though. We're working on the carry part.