Through this inaction, the Supreme Court has cleared a path for other communities across the nation to:

—outlaw assault weapons and high capacity magazines,

—declare these arms contraband and confiscate them,

—and hit violators with jail time and/or a sizable fine.

“The Supreme Court has now signaled that this is consistent with Second Amendment,” Mike McLively, staff attorney at the Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, tells Rolling Stone. “This could become a national model.”

A national model.  Right.  The writer clearly doesn’t have a clue as to the consequences of this being a national model.  The modes of warfare the resistance could take are numerous.

First of all, since person-to-person transfers of guns is legal and Form 4473 isn’t a determinative record of gun ownership, there is no way for the *.fed to ascertain who has a gun and who doesn’t.  The only way to effect such a confiscation would be door-to-door searches of every home in America, contrary of course to the constitution.

Next, upon such searches, very few firearms would be found.  Most of them would be hidden, all but a few sacrificial lamb guns the owners intended to be found anyway.  It would be a gigantic waste of money for which there wouldn’t be adequate money or manpower resources.

Third, when a banned firearm was used in a self defense situation, rather than go to the state penitentiary for ownership of a banned weapon when the goal was mere defense of family, law enforcement officers might be shot as they entered homes.

Or in the case that weapons were confiscated after such events and the perpetrator (i.e., the one who defended his wife during a home invasion) had been dispositioned through the court, some particularly ill-tempered gun owner might decide to take vengeance on the cop who put him in prison, or perhaps all of his cop buddies.

Or perhaps the gun owner’s friends might not like what they saw and use this as an opportunity to warn other LEOs of the dangers of said confiscations.

Oh dear.  The manifestations of this conflict are far too numerous to detail, and then what I’ve put forward here is only the more pedestrian and mundane of the possibilities.

No gun confiscation scheme is a national model for anything but civil war.  That Rolling Stone doesn’t get that speaks volumes, not of the worth of that periodical, which we all knew anyway, but of the cluelessness of the progressive mind.  That’s the most troubling aspect of this commentary.  We can only pray that they realize the carnage that would ensue under their schema.  If they do and desire this anyway, then there is a cold wind blowing as a harbinger of a dark storm.