http://dailycaller.com/2013/01/09/iowa-lawmaker-calls-for-retroactive-gun-bans-confiscations-of-semi-automatic-weapons/ http://www.examiner.com/article/new-york-governor-confiscation-of-guns-could-be-an-option http://www.carrollspaper.com/main.asp?SectionID=1&SubSectionID=1&ArticleID=14934 here are a couple of links about politicians calling for gun confiscation. One of them even has audio, just in case reading is too hard for you.

Now, the bills don't have to state the exact word confiscate, it can be implied. From Missouri HB 545 The bill specifies that any person who was legally in possession of an assault weapon or large capacity magazine prior to the effective date of these provisions will have 90 days to remove the assault weapon or large capacity magazine from the state, render the assault weapon permanently inoperable, or surrender the assault weapon or large capacity magazine to the appropriate law enforcement agency for destruction. Now, what do you think happens if a citizen does not follow this? I would say that the weapon/magazine would be confiscated. Reading comprehension is a beautiful thing.

I sent you links for 3 bills, and a story on a package of 10 bills in California, some of which talk about confiscation. Some talk about unwarranted searches. I can't help that you either refuse to read or lack the ability of reading comprehension to realize what is in those bills.

Well it seems that the post from TROUBLED_CALIFORNIAN about my links has disappeared. He wanted to trash my presentation of facts without ever presenting any facts of his own. Instead he is one that turns to using derogatory terms in an elementary schoolyard fashion to try to trivialize opposing opinions. This is a tactic used by many to try to silence their opposition. I find it cowardly. If you choose this lame form of debate instead of showing or be willing to show a factual basis for your argument then you earn every bit of disrespect that you receive.

You didn't fully read.

Well, you did ask for links to news and facts to support what we were saying. I provided them to you. Just because you are unwilling to read does not mean that the facts aren't there. If you choose not to do your own research, that is not my problem. That is your choice to stay stupid. I can fix many things but I can't fix stupid.

http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/021213-644201-dhs-buys-7000-semiautomatic-assault-weapons.htm http://beforeitsnews.com/alternative/2013/03/dhs-buys-2700-armored-vehicles-for-streets-of-america-2583728.html Again, start reading. Of course you could have easily googled this yourself.

TROUBLED_CALIFORNIAN Show your proof. Quit using derogatory terms and show actual documented facts.

He wanted facts, I supplied him facts. I doubt that he would either have the ability to understand everything in these bills or the attention span to actually pay attention to what they say. It is hard to argue against the actual text of the bills.

http://www.leg.state.or.us/13reg/measpdf/hb3200.dir/hb3200.intro.pdf http://www.nraila.org/media/10886389/mo_hb_545.pdf http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/02/08/gun-confiscation-bill-introduced-in-california-we-can-save-lives/ http://apps.leg.wa.gov/documents/billdocs/2013-14/Pdf/Bills/Senate%20Bills/5737.pdf There you go, get reading.