There, did that get your attention? ;)
I have wavered back and forth on the topic of what I would do when they come to retrieve my firearms and I have flogged it to death along these lines...
A. The ones doing the dirty work.
The ones who would be doing the coming to get them would only be performing the duties that they are paid to perform. It is hard (philosophically, morally, or any other way you look at it) to initiate armed aggression on those who are "only doing their jobs". Of course, the car loaders in 1940's Europe were "only doing their jobs" when they loaded civilians onto trains. Whether or not the loaders knew the final destination / purpose of the trains is irrelevant at some point. Sure, it is possible that at the beginning of the "relocation effort" some (mayhap most) had no idea what was happening; but, at some point in time, it is quite unlikely that they no longer had knowledge of the end use.
There is no real limit to the suffering that we, as humans, are capable of inflicting on others when it is sanctioned by some "Higher Authority". Pretty sure that God would have us do unto others as we would have them do unto us.
B. The ones who would be ordering the dirty work.
These worry me more. These are the Clintons, Emmanuels and Holders of the world. They are actually in a position to thwart the Constitution outright by implementing a ban on firearms. They are also in a position to circumvent the Constitution by leveraging UN mandates against us. It is this group that would actually "legalize" the firearm ban / grab and make it ok for the group from A or, more likely C to implement.
In this case, we have to hope that those with the means and the oath to support the Constitution come to our aid.
Having served in the Army and for a short period in the National Guard, I know the oath that I took includes defending the Constitution from all enemies foreign and domestic. To my knowledge, I am still sworn under that oath no matter that I am no longer on active duty. I don't remember ever being freed of that pledge.
And, from what little (and it is very little) that I know of Law Enforcement, their oath seems to generally include similar language about preservation of the Constitution.
Let us all pray, hope and/or believe that the implementers (A) will tell the enablers (B) to stow it and tell the enablers' dogs (C) to move along peaceably.
C. The politicians, attorneys & activist judges (oh my) might raise a force that does not have the same Constitutional oath.
This actually worries me the worst (not the most... the worst). If this comes to pass, we all need to worry. With all the talk of the "brown shirts", it is not unreasonable to take the next logical step. Upon the arrival of the administration's "brown shirts", it is safe to believe that upholding the Constitution will not be a prime directive. Especially since the formation of the "brown shirt" contingent is not provided for under the Constitution. Of course, neither are most forms of taxation levied by the Congress, but that doesn't slow them down one bit.
Also, just because the "brown shirts" start out listening to the administration... it does not mean that they will forever more.
D. If there be confiscation, there is nothing that says it must be done while I am at home.
With the proper search and seizure warrant, they would have all the documentation that they need to forcibly enter my home and confiscate whatever they choose to... probably all while I am not home to go to jail with my stuff. That just bugs me... while I am not home. That is the easiest way to disarm the populace, do it while they are at work.
Concealed carry permit holders / and users of said permit will still (in alll likelihood) be armed even after the home has been disarmed.
E. My response.
As I have said before, if I am home, I will just not answer the door. And, if I am not home, I hope they break in with as little collateral damage as possible. I wish them the best of luck in removing the gun safe and/or its contents.