Gun Confiscation

what will actual, real life gun confiscation look like if/when the 2nd amendment is removed from the constitution?

Attached: BCM-URG-Std-20-KMR-A-15-10.jpg (1200x800, 113.37K)

Other urls found in this thread:

wcbs880.radio.com/articles/lawmakers-drafting-bill-would-allow-social-media-checks-gun-purchase?fbclid=IwAR0ZLBxszLCgUhYs0bIFsY-0U6-pAbP8sV4-1361TPm275Zv21nNVSU-SLY
archive.fo/9N7TV
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

Probably like the australian one but on a way larger scale…and a lot more violence. We've still got a million sks buried somewhere in the outback that cunts still use for hunting. Americans have a culture spanning well over 300 years and over 300 million guns in the country- and a lot more balls to stand up for what they believe in. The US NEEDS guns gone because they are on the verge of the biggest financial collapse since the great depression, and the government can't just nationalize absolutely everything if cunts everywhere answer with bullets.

Attached: 8905ea91a8062b857a07a9866111a12fc812754803d444e1fbd6b6d521fc8774.png (476x346, 163.39K)

Balkan War with a side order of Syria
My nipples are hard at the thought of such a thing.

Every Zig Forumsommando in America will hand in their guns and run innawoods to eat cum brownies while the civil war rages around them. Even the boomer fudds and tacticool mall ninjas will make fun of them. Prove me wrong.

Attached: skynews-scott-paul-beierle_4474516.jpg (750x563, 64.34K)

Hint: It never will be. They'll continue the slow boil. Pass a law, have a turn-in period. Maybe a registry if they're feeling frisky. Arrest a few people who weren't compliant. Have an amnesty period. Rinse and repeat. Continue to make arrests of those found to be in violation of the law. Pass another law. Rinse and repeat. First it'll be a mag ban, then deeper "assault weapon" restrictions, mandatory background checks, then semi-auto bans, caliber bans (goodbye .50 BMG), storage requirements, licensing requirements for certain types of guns, licensing requirements for all guns, gun purchase limits, ammo purchase limits, then tighten the screws on all of the above.

Pretty much exactly what they did with the 1934 NFA. Are there illegal machineguns? Yes. Do the powers that be sweat over them at all? No.

First by buyback, buybacks are moderately successful amongst the boomer and memelenial cucks. After that, they might try to confiscate the rest but I just don't see how that's viable. There's hundreds of thousands, maybe even millions, of Americans who are preparing for that exact situation where the feds try to take their shit. That's a lot of bloodshed and death for really nothing gained. There's somewhere around 300 million registered firearms, who knows how much unregistered firearms there are both legal and illegal.

I highly doubt there will be many cops/nasty girls willing to get shot and killed over taking a private citizen's AR baby killer, maybe if it was one or two confiscations and they were very well convinced because of "mental illness" or whatever the case might be, but a widespread confiscation there's no way.

I guess the most sensible confiscation is first by buyback, then by slowly increasing restrictions and what the fed can legally confiscate your firearms for. So it'd look like this. First they can take away your shit for domestic abuse or mental illness or flight watch risk, people will not object to that. Then it will be for "hate speech" or other thought crime, people will likely not object to that either. Then they will change the definitions of what hate speech and mental illness, sticking people they find to be "extremist" by using data from social media on the government no fly list, thus expanding gun restriction to a higher percentage of people and getting LEO support behind it.

My old prediction remains the exact same, nothing is going to happen. There would be buy backs and amnesties that some would take, but the majority of the 400 million guns in the US would not be turned in and their lessons from the 1990's is they can't go door to door to take them because they don't have enough men and morale. It'll be a law on the books that nobody will really enforce and many will simply not obey, they will sit and go "In like 70 years all the guns will be gone" and 70 years into it most of the guns will still be out there and the gun banners will go "Well, we'll just wait another 70 years, then we'll get it" and it'll probably be more like Finland where all those illegal unregistered war booty guns will just sit in the same closets and hiding places forever and never get turned in forever.

You've probably even heard some anti gun people lament that its too late for gun control in the US for civilian disarmament, there's simply far too many guns in the hands of far too many people who will never turn them in, with families that will continue to hold onto their guns for generations. They might pass a law just to sit on their hands. Its more likely there will be an upheavel, revolution, world war before civilian disarmament in the US would ever occur from age and attrition.

It'll either be or , because the Feds know is right on the button. They know full well they don't have enough bodies to throw into the thresher, not even if they drafted people to do it.

It would be to ballsy to outright repeal the 2nd. What would do is just ban shit until we're only allowed to have muzzle loaders

One important aspect of gun control that is often ignored but is very detrimental is outlawing self-defense, especially with guns. EU already has that, most other countries are even worse, which is one of the reasons their gun culture is so dead and guns are treated worse than ever and easily blamed by populists. Remember, gun control is not only about protecting government power, but about turning things that way so that government can keep and expand its job at "fixing" them.

It will be like little rock and the current situation on the border.

I see more dead democrat politicians than cops.

I'd find it very hard to believe that the commies would be able to outlaw self-defense. They'd have to do it federally because it'd be damn near impossible to regress self-defense laws in red states. However that is a valid point and something to consider.

When the goal is destabilizing the country to have people begging for help, outlawing responsibility and independence is the largest hurdle for multiple issues.

So it begins; wcbs880.radio.com/articles/lawmakers-drafting-bill-would-allow-social-media-checks-gun-purchase?fbclid=IwAR0ZLBxszLCgUhYs0bIFsY-0U6-pAbP8sV4-1361TPm275Zv21nNVSU-SLY

I thought you guys had guns in order to prevent exactly this kind of scenario?

New Yorkers will roll over and take it as always. The closest they ever came to actually doing something was during the soda ban. This law will take years to get past the Constitutional challenges though if it ever does.

So … "I wouldn't worry about it"? You do remember that they told the Bongs the exact same thing before every one of the cuckenings that have been unleashed on them, right?

A bunch of dead liberals.

I'll migrate to the US and join the local resistance group.

They'll confiscate them once the US is 10% white, so there'll be barely any resistance.

You don't outlaw self defence, instead you create some arbitrary bullshit like "excessive force" which can mean
That way you wouldn't jail someone for self defense, but you'd jail a violent sociopath for brutalizing urban youth.

Americans would gladly turn them in since they are a bunch of cucks.
The few people who might offer any resistance would be ratted out by their friends, family, and neighbors and end up with their house bombed.
There is no good end. We pretty much lost since we can't effectively fight back due to "muh PEE ARR".

Your point is well-taken Jakub, but some countries haven't even bothered with that route, and explicitly outlawed self-defense, saying that any bad goy has a "duty to retreat" from Abdul and Tyrone whenever they try to enrich his daughter.

Attached: better_check_em.webm (854x480, 94.75K)

No way that any true, red-blooded American would let the 2nd amendment be infringed upon. All the based right wing militias and constitution loving patriots would rise up in a rebellion that the government could never win, just like what happened when California banned guns, or when New York banned guns, or when those lovely folks at in the NRA agreed with all of those common sense gun regulations.

You people are delusional if you think the 2nd amendment will ever be repealed outright, and even more delusional if you think the people will rise up in rebellion as guns and accessories continue to be regulated on a federal level, or outright banned on a state level as steady over the next 50 years as they have been over the last 50. Even as hispanic immigration turns Texas and Florida to blue states like California and effectively turns America into a Leninist one-party state, offering welfare gibs to hispanics and blacks in exchange for votes and fueled by the GDP of a browbeaten white (and asian) minority, I don't think the democrats will ever be ballsy enough to outright appeal the 2nd. Especially as the consequences diversification lead to increasingly pro-gun attitudes among the white-minority.

archive.fo/9N7TV
It started

America is fucked. We already lost.
Only way to save it now would be through nuclear war. That won't happen either.

(((red flags )))
>not okay with homosexuals molesting teaching schoolchildren

They dont need to remove anything. They just will do what they did last century - make more regulation and confiscate guns when they label you "mentaly ill" or "felon"

Tada, you have a disarmed country. Obviously there will still be guns, since gun control doesn't actually work, but that's perfect for the government. A disarmed country isn't one where no people are armed. It's one where the people aren't armed. If gun owners other than criminals are a fringe group, then they go from a threat against the government to a benefit. Once the propaganda turns enough of the population against guns, any failures of gun control can be redirected anywhere the government likes, since nobody will admit gun control doesn't work. Violence against women? Hate speech? Mental illness? You name it, they can use guns for it. Hell, a shooting that left only two dead over the weekend made international news because the shooter posted misogynist videos four years ago.

The only confiscations would be a few token enforcements of the slow-boiling regulations. And with those, even the cases of cops getting shot would only further the gun control. There wouldn't be enough for it to crush manpower or morale, and it would just give fodder to the propaganda, especially with each individual law being only a small tightening from the previous ones. A ban on semi-autos? You'd get some public support. Shooting grabbers over a reduction from a 10 round mag limit to 5? You'd go down as an overreacting psychopath who shouldn't have even had the five, because that particular restriction isn't a big deal and almost nobody sees the big picture. Or in cases like where an individual is specifically flagged as dangerous, shooting the cops is just "proof" they were right to flag you.

Excessive use of force.

They did it in USSR (Russia). Killing somebody with weapon in self-dense only allowed if attacker has better weapons. Otherwise it is guaranteed murder charge and guilty verdict.

All that's needed to get your guns taken is for someone to call the cops and tell them you're a scary person. Jesus. That aunt better feel like a fucking cunt for getting that man killed.

Nah, she's clapping for the police and thinking of how great they are for removing that "dangerous" man.

They would never confiscate all at once. Slowly over a long period they would change the laws and minds of the people in order to take away what little is left peacefully without a fight

Attached: 1500153446270.png (808x805, 479.56K)

Would it entail rehabilitation, or just making us do forced labor?

Attached: 9518c1c991a60f502f1eb6dc73909bcd0ed58169e7bfbce01c4e0a2e0b670ea7.png (500x939, 442.1K)

Thats actually a good question

They'd probably chemically castrate you then ship off to work to death in the amazon warehouses. Or use you as a training dummy for the culture police

It's not even a question. If someone breaks in trying to steal my shit they're getting clapped

JUST

Attached: c2f782ccffbe762c3793bca41d39082bfff725c57709c09dabea24c1a5a18e41.jpg (540x960, 37.96K)

First one sounds worse. those autismo zogbots would do more damage than some lobomotmite working himself to death

Plus you know they'd make you fuck a tranny, or a fat nigger

I'd kneecap a stranger for a tangerine.

Basically this. They are counting on millenials to be just as cucked as their boomer parents and they will be zyklon b is wishful thinking. If all goes according to plan, complete gun confiscation won't happen in our lifetimes. It will happen 200 years from now after the population looks like the soypod humans in WALL-E except with more melanin

Frankly, if you know what the 2A says and means and you still remain in compliance with any law on the books whatsoever, you are a cuck. People in Wyoming don't get to look down on commiefornians when they still pay a $200 tax per silencer, worry about whether their riflespacepistol is in compliance with whatever ATF pulls out of its ass, and don't have the balls to geocache a drum full of unregistered ARs with giggle switches for shtf.

Despite all the edgy marketing and arfcom boomer tirades, firearm ownership is essentially just an expensive hobby in the US that you can show off on instagram. There is no group or politician that is going to change that. The only thing that changes is it is every firearm owner in the country deciding to tell ZOG to fuck off, but right now people are too fat and content and have far too much to lose.

Due to inflation caused by the third world i value life fairly low.

Actually. they worth more.

Attached: Hitler_smile.jpg (318x159 25.91 KB, 4.8K)

The subuman nigger kike who violates my property is hardly worth the buckshot used to dispatch him.

What are good ways of disposing of nigger burglars without them also staining the floors, walls or furniture with themselves?

Probably none since any effective method will cause plenty of bleeding

Funny thing is that if they asked nicely what they need I will help them to the best of my ability without interfering with my benefits
Which is a damn large margin
But we all know that niggers, kikes and normies are the creation of the devil and they simply lack goodness, which is the sole root of evil.


Kill them before they are even on your Grundstück?

Attached: in_the_beginning_was_the_world_1937_painting.jpg (433x433 175.31 KB, 46.09K)

On the other hand

faggot

Attached: Capture.PNG (280x226, 161.12K)

Read the comment chain. implies you will be arrested for the self-defense. In such a scenario, in which arrest is a given, is right on the mark. Your scenario is one in which your arrest is not occurring and is sound advice in that scenario, but that wasn't the scenario originally proposed.

Please mind my retardation user.

see

They passed a law in Maryland that allows law enforcement total discretion to declare someone mentally ill with no evidence whatsoever and seize their guns. That means effectively the 2nd Amendment already is repealed in Maryland, because guns can be seized any time, anywhere, and for no reason at all–no evidence of any crime committed required.

Oh, and the law also allows relatives to claim (again, with no evidence) that a relative is mentally ill. Some bitch just did this to a guy, and cops went to take his guns and shot him. So, it's already happening. Guns are being confiscated right now, and they'll shoot you if you resist.

Checked.


Also checked.

I believe it will involve analysis by computer. I believe troops will be sent out, and they'll be fucking stupid and just uphold orders. They'll know your sentiments, and on that basis alone they'll do the house search, and also require you to wear monitoring equipment.

Our only option, once that occurs, is to begin the fight, and also head for the hills.

But I believe we can save America, through a set of artful strategies, that will delegitimize the "elected" government, and give rise to military intervention, and a new order, one where individual civil defense is prioritized.

So if the US falls, what countries actually do have good gun laws?

Attached: 70A16C36-2024-42AA-B971-F02C27959B62.jpeg (800x620, 108.52K)

Don't let it happen.

Don't run from problems, it will not solve anything.

Go out in a blaze of glory, you faggot. You're exactly like the rapefugees that want to go to some welfare state like Germoney to collect government cheese while their homeland is being raped.

No thanks.

You're talking about a scenario where guns are already banned.

Attached: 7b29cef3e58afbfba1b945ea6e27e80dbe7226c65d83ecced09ba55ee1d5d577.jpg (606x871, 51.03K)

get fucked POG

/thread

prove yourself right

You're already positing a situation in which leaving the country is likely to result in you having more firearms freedom than staying. How much more anti-gun do you think it's going to get? If that's the path we're on we'll continue down it regardless of if you blat a few cops or not.

So basically the only solution is stockpiling guns and ammo while you still have the chance ?

This was the original post-election plan, goddammit.
Then shilling for more "election threads" in other countries is what happened. Permanent revolution tripe that kept it from actually going forward.

Switzerland, depending on the state/Kanton. But I doubt they'll let a bunch of burgers in, based solely on "MUH GUNS!". Immigration to Switzerland is based on their need for certain jobs. If they don't need your profession, you're either not getting in or even going home.
On the other hand, their laws can be pretty savage. If you're from albania and a couple of other nations, who's citizens don't have a good track record, you're not getting a gun, end of story.

On the plus side, amassing a full giggle arsenal there is not that difficult or expensive as you buy the guns from manufacturers or any seller and not some 50yr old gun that has been abused as an investment because lol registry closed.As far as I know, in some Kantons only local PD has to sign off on your machinegun purchase, even if its a 11" suppressed full giggle beltfed AR15, although they'll give you a sideways look, because why buy an AR when you can have a Sig55X?
Thats just hearsay though, so take it with a grain of salt.

They have a very active shooting culture due to the whole 'conscripts take their guns home' thing. Nowadays they don't have to, but they can pay some cash to take their rifle home, so it is still an option.

Another country would be Greenland, as leaving home without a rifle there is just dumb. Plenty of hungry polar bears.

Finally, you have Poland and the Czech Republic, Poland with the option to upgrade your license to the point that you can own assault rifles. They have regular paramilitary training as well, in towns, as Polske Wal or so, where they fire blanks in full gear while the townsfolk watch and almost applaud. Its their WW2 resistance group, which has survived to this day as a network and regularly works with the army, its just extremely decentralized, to the point where its not really centralized at all.
The Czechs have a fairly liberal ( meaning free, not US-liberal, god fucking damn this shit, how the fuck did they get to change language so much? Fuck!) gun policy as well, lots of people go in to former Pact nations to go shoot guns and stuff.

Killing someone with a weapon is allowed if you could get seriously hurt or killed as well. If someone attacks you with a crowbar let alone a gun, you can just kill them on the spot and that will be a valid self-defense. If you got into a fist fight and you starting to have your face beaten into pulp and there's no signs that the attacker will leave you alone until after you die, you can shoot them too.

God this fucking "self defense is illegal" FUD is getting on my nerves, every fucking dipshit is parroting this when you can pretty fucking easily find evidence to the contrary.

Bro, it's not that self-defense is "illegal" or something, it's that if you get caught you've got extremely low chances to get out of it, even if the law is fully on your side.

Do you know what's the reason why Russian courts have astronomically low acquittal rates for felonies and thatsuch? Because if the court acquits the defendant of anything, it is considered prosecutions' fuckup since that's the result of their failure to deliver a rock-solid case so the judge would have grounds to dismiss the charge. Then said prosecutors will have their assholes reamed to 1" above their current diameters by their superiors, and among other things like possible demotion, it means salary bonus cuts which constitute upwards of 50% of cops' salaries. So they have incentive to put you to jail because that would raise their bonuses and accelerate promotion. But they also have much stronger incentive not to put on you any charges that aren't already proven beyond a shadow of a doubt, for the reason outlined above. By the time the case goes to court, all charges are rock-solid and there's absolutely nothing to acquit one for. In effect, the court doesn't decide whether one is guilty or not (the prosecution had came up with all the evidence one could possibly need), only decides what punishment, out of prescribed for a felony, to apply.

Attached: 1436938541650.jpg (253x296, 18.92K)

...

This is all understandable but the system still incentivizes fabrication of proof and passing unsolved cases with already convicted people. They just have to send cases that have proof beyond some common limit that would filter them, so if you were unlucky enough to get caught and they had put enough data onto you the same situation as i mentioned above appears. It's just the same "do not get caught" thing, it just changes a bit from don't get into their arms' reach to don't let them hang any proofs, cases or crimes, whether you were guilty or not.

The cases that are "bound with white thread" get torn apart in court for that very reason. It's exceedingly difficult to put unrelated charges on a convict without losing a rank or two.

Well, i hope you're right. I would prefer to not take my chances though.

Just no. It's so socialist that even the citizens aren't even allowed to own land.

At that point there won't be anything worth fighting for.

Don't think there's much to fight for as is. You grow up hearing about how America's super free and it's barely more permissive than eurozone. I don't think there's a single truly free country left in the world. It's all business and housing and grocery stores, conservation societies and pussies grabbing daddy government's pocket. Only place I can think of is the dead buttfuck nowhere in a hippie earthship that's not even on the fucking road map.

Not really, an actually good question is "Are my possessions worth your life?"

When you make a decision to steal something, you have just decided how much your life is worth to you. Personally I am not concerned with a theif's self worth, to any sensible person it is a matter of ammo cost vs item of mine being stolen. If you steal a pencil, not worth it. But anything more than 10 bucks is worth 5 rounds of $2 per shot ammo. And that's expensive ammo. Get some milsurp shit and you are good to go for a full mag dump to secure your nice toaster oven.

Attached: 5b593439111d2ca2b91323e322e423f482ba547deb89674a2cfec435680d5a44.gif (500x300, 977.01K)

You see Pole, thats why we dont have good gun laws.>>622493 We europoors are cucked into believing that others life worths more than our possessions…

Unless you're Swiss.

The law is clear, at least in this state, Castle Doctrine is the rule. If you're found within a dwelling or occupied vehicle that you were NOT invited into by the legally occupying residence or owner; nor you have a legal right to enter…it is assumed your actions are malicious in nature with intent to harm and the occupants and or vehicle owner have a right to pump your degenerate ass full of buckshot with lethal intent.

Many local departments will refuse to confiscate, many more simply won't due to the danger. Places that do would probably already be liberal hellholes, and so there might not be that much resistance there.

It would be anoodah shoah

No it isn't.
Nobody's life really has value, inherently.
What matters is rights.
You violate my rights by stealing my shit. That's my property, not yours.

Yes. A human life isn't worth that much really. I value some animals lives at more than a human because animals can't be disgusting degenerates.

A gradual erosion of the classes of firearm you can have e.g. no guns without a bullet button because nobody will resist a minor tweak around the edges with older guns generally grandfathered in as machineguns were require registering etc but with Canada-style rules about grandfathering that make it really easy to seize and destroy them if the person is convicted of a crime or dies without specific instructions on what to do. Bonus points if you also come up with more weird laws about length and conversions to make it easier to convict people. This way you can slowly confiscate them as people who already hold them fuck up without causing an instant flashpoint. Anyone who doesn't want to hassle of registering them can have them purchased at full market price. Rinse and repeat every few generations and make sure any new advances in firearms are automatically prohibited so people are left with more and more outdated firearms. If there's a huge shift in technology as happens ever few centuries then civilians are at a large disadvantage.

Slowly limit who can actually sell firearms with tightening regulation. Do the same with ranges and pass laws preventing shooting on even private ground if it's within x miles of a city or town or even ban use outside of registered ranges and hunting entirely. This will lead to some areas being de facto gun free for anyone who doesn't make a huge effort to travel places to purchase and practice: if you don't have the disposable income to spend on both then you're essentially locked out of firearms 'culturally'. This is how it worked in Bongland.

Do something with ammo. Ban any new sort of ammo that comes in from civilian sales there's precedent here with 'armour piercing' ammo but think of the next step up from smokeless powder as a hypothetical example to feed into your goal of freezing civilian firearms at their current technology level or worse. If you can then eventually crack down on the actual production, purchasing and stockpiling of ammo be that through laws (need a license to purchase it, only x amount can be stockpiled without a valid reason or whatever) and banning the importation of ammo or better yet by informally leaning on manufacturers to align with your goals i.e. they should stop producing certain calibres, up the price, limit how much someone can purchase, develop new cucked types of ammo with degrading properties to stop stockpiling and so on. If you're slowly reducing stocks of civilian firearms in specific calibres through the use of grandfathering etc then naturally the ammo for them will become more expensive and eventually not worth producing at all. If reloading becomes a loophole to this then put heavy restrictions on who can purchase the equipment and the powder/primers define them as restricted explosives, that's already more or less an established concept under the NFA but it probably won't be necessary since that will be limited to a small number of enthusiasts anyway.

They've already established that being convicted of domestic abuse can have your guns removed, now you just need to expand it out to being accused as a precautionary measure already done with children then expand what categories of offence can result in this action. Women are more than 50% of the vote and are susceptible to this sort of thing. By the way this already applies if you have a restraining order against an 'intimate partner' and all it takes is a helpful incident or two to expand that to cover any restraining order.

Push all of the above with various 'tragedies', not just school shootings but imagine how useful something like another hurricane and the headline 'crazed veteran shoots rescue workers after refusing to temporarily hand over firearms'. Kebab attacks are also good. You can either manufacture them or wait for them to happen naturally and exploit them.

Why would they remove it when they can simply redefine it? The principle that certain classes of firearm are not protected is already established. Look at how Mexico gets around its constitutional requirement to allow gun ownership by having a single gun store in the entire nation.

You're an idiot if you think any modern government will make the mistake of giving people a single incident to oppose when they could simply play the long game. Each generation will tolerate the laws they grew up with and something a little bit more restrictive so you just have to keep on moving that window. Every restriction reduces the number of gun owners by a few % and the smaller that % gets the easier future restrictions become.

...

Speaking of excessive force, what kind of weapon should I acquire to make sure whatever I hit never gets back up?

A gun. Preferably of a larger caliber.

Good advice, thank you friend.

A sledgehammer (if your house can accommodate an overhand swing), a large caliber firearm, maybe a shotgun, if you're a noguns or like to LARP a .50 lead ball musket will either eliminate your urban youth or at least create a smokescreen for you to reposition.
If you don't want to have only 1 shot but still like the idea of not only shooting nigs with antique designs but having smoke a ball and cap revolver gives you six shots of .45 or .50 with some models allowing for a cartridge conversion cylinders.

This. Its really easy to get a black powder pistol and convert it to use cartridges.

This works well.

Attached: (2).jpg (2560x1440, 537.59K)

Is that the only picture you have on your computer? You do realise it's loaded with blanks, right?

Right, that's to keep from hurting people with it. Could be a fucking disaster with live ammo don't ya think.

Politicians are the best gun salesmen I know. You should see the line at Cabelas gun counter right now. The best way to ensure everybody has them is to talk banning them and just look how well outlawing good drugs worked. Illicit drugs would be dirt cheap if they were legal and less people would be interested in them.

You guys ever watch CIAlex Jones when he goes to the range, he can't ever find the safety to turn it off. Those range clips are hilarious to watch someone as inept as he attempt to sell a gun story. He reminds of Moe of the 3 Stooges. I like how he takes everyone else's gun away and shoots their ammo once they turn off the safety for him that shit is hysterically funny.

The gun you don't own? Yeah.