In response to massmoderateJoe's comment:

 

In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

 

In response to massmoderateJoe's comment:

still not effect people breaking the law.

 

Of course they will! Have you not been following?

The point is NOT that the law criminalizing failure to register will "effect people breaking the law" directly. It's that it will make it way harder for those people to get guns in the first place!

 

 

If I am going to be sent to jail for reselling a gun to someone without registering the sale, then I won't resell the gun to someone without registering the sale.

If I register the sale, and that gun is linked to a no-suspect shooting, guess who the suspect is: The next buyer.

The point is to cut off the flow of guns to the people who do end up using them illegally. Where do you think these people are getting the guns? Are they all stolen from gun shops? NO! They were once legal guns.

 

And if I don't register the sale, and the gun is linked to a shooting, I'll be charged with a crime. The pressure will then be on me to rat out who I sold it to. That person will be the suspect in the shooting, or the guy who sold the gun again to the suspect.

And so on.

It provides a way to choke the flow of weapons from legal to black markets, with the added bonus that it provides a means to find out who committed shootings where the suspect isn't otherwise caught.

 

 

So I see registration as the first step to further restriction and confiscation; history shows us that its happened before.

 

In which country? Huh?

Again, all I can see is paranoia, not logic, driving your fears about having to register your guns.

Whether you have to register or not, if there is such a sea change in popular opinion that government comes for everyone's guns........the fact that you have an FID card, not a registration number, is not going to protect your guns.

I really don't understand why you aren't grasping that part of things. If the world turns upside down, the 2nd Amd. is repealed, and government really does start confiscating all guns.....      

...it doesn't matter whether you have FID vs. registration!

Did government raid everyone's house when prohibition went into effect? NO! They raided places suspected of continuing to serve booze. They checked suspicious cars.

You'd be in the same position as an individual making bathtub gin during prohibition, regardless of FID or registration.....        sorry, that is not a logical slippery slope.

But that isn't going to happen. See: Paranoia.

 

It's really simple; if gun purchases are registered then the government knows where they are.  If the laws change; they look at the list and come get them.

 

If there isn't a registry it's more like your prohibition example where they didn't knock on doors.

I'm a very strong supporter of personal rights, and avoid government oversight whenever I can.

 

So basically, you don't want to register your gun because if gun ownership ever became illegal, you want to be better positioned to break the law?

 

 

So basically, you don't want to register your gun because if gun ownership ever became illegal, you want to be better positioned to break the law?

 

wdywn, this is the crystallization of my rejection of your argument here.

The registration law will not prevents criminals from getting guns and ammo, but creates a system where legal owners can be tracked by the government. 

The registration law will not prevents criminals from getting guns and ammo

 

I know better than everyone else. Everyone who disagrees with me is wrong.

In response to tvoter's comment: 

No no, really. You're drawing the wrong lesson from that precedent.

Clue: It made him look like a complete idiot.

Ok, but I'm not talking about "government tracking" beyond that minimum: Registering each sale of gun & ammo.

We don't need searches or harassment. Just the fact hanging over your head that if you're the last registered purchaser of a gun or ammo that ends up at a crime scene, you face criminal charges.

That would severely cut into the flow of weapons into the black market. Over time, the black market supply would dry up as police seize weapons, as weapons are discarded post-crime, as weapons eventually break down.

Yes, there is still some government monitoring. But it seems extremely minimal to me compared to the problem (most per capita gun violence on earth) and the importance of the privacy at interest.

In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

 

In response to tvoter's comment: 

No no, really. You're drawing the wrong lesson from that precedent.

Clue: It made him look like a complete idiot.

 

Criminals do not register their guns now!!

 

How is making a law that says everyone must register their guns going to help stop criminals from getting guns? Criminals dont give a shlt about our gun laws!!

It's a assinine law that only affects law abiding citizens!

A govt that wants a record of everyone that has guns and where they are; should be feared by citizens that support the 2nd ammendment!

 

 

In response to slomag's comment:

 

In response to massmoderateJoe's comment:

 

In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

 

In response to massmoderateJoe's comment:

still not effect people breaking the law.

 

Of course they will! Have you not been following?

The point is NOT that the law criminalizing failure to register will "effect people breaking the law" directly. It's that it will make it way harder for those people to get guns in the first place!

 

 

If I am going to be sent to jail for reselling a gun to someone without registering the sale, then I won't resell the gun to someone without registering the sale.

If I register the sale, and that gun is linked to a no-suspect shooting, guess who the suspect is: The next buyer.

The point is to cut off the flow of guns to the people who do end up using them illegally. Where do you think these people are getting the guns? Are they all stolen from gun shops? NO! They were once legal guns.

 

And if I don't register the sale, and the gun is linked to a shooting, I'll be charged with a crime. The pressure will then be on me to rat out who I sold it to. That person will be the suspect in the shooting, or the guy who sold the gun again to the suspect.

And so on.

It provides a way to choke the flow of weapons from legal to black markets, with the added bonus that it provides a means to find out who committed shootings where the suspect isn't otherwise caught.

 

 

So I see registration as the first step to further restriction and confiscation; history shows us that its happened before.

 

In which country? Huh?

Again, all I can see is paranoia, not logic, driving your fears about having to register your guns.

Whether you have to register or not, if there is such a sea change in popular opinion that government comes for everyone's guns........the fact that you have an FID card, not a registration number, is not going to protect your guns.

I really don't understand why you aren't grasping that part of things. If the world turns upside down, the 2nd Amd. is repealed, and government really does start confiscating all guns.....      

...it doesn't matter whether you have FID vs. registration!

Did government raid everyone's house when prohibition went into effect? NO! They raided places suspected of continuing to serve booze. They checked suspicious cars.

You'd be in the same position as an individual making bathtub gin during prohibition, regardless of FID or registration.....        sorry, that is not a logical slippery slope.

But that isn't going to happen. See: Paranoia.

 

It's really simple; if gun purchases are registered then the government knows where they are.  If the laws change; they look at the list and come get them.

 

If there isn't a registry it's more like your prohibition example where they didn't knock on doors.

I'm a very strong supporter of personal rights, and avoid government oversight whenever I can.

 

So basically, you don't want to register your gun because if gun ownership ever became illegal, you want to be better positioned to break the law?

 

 

 

I'd call it civil disobediance, because going that far would be a break in our Constitution.  

 

In response to tvoter's comment:

 

In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

 

In response to tvoter's comment: 

No no, really. You're drawing the wrong lesson from that precedent.

Clue: It made him look like a complete idiot.

 

Criminals do not register their guns now!!

 

How is making a law that says everyone must register their guns going to help stop criminals from getting guns? Criminals dont give a shlt about our gun laws!!

It's a assinine law that only affects law abiding citizens!

A govt that wants a record of everyone that has guns and where they are; should be feared by citizens that support the 2nd ammendment!

 

 

 

You will never get through to liberals or Democrats on this for one simple reason.  To citizens, criminals and crazies are a problem.  To Democrats, they are constituencies.

 

No other way to expalin the unwillingness to drop the boom on criminals and crazies, but instead drop the boom on law abiding citizens.

So the proposed law is that you can only purchase ammo if you own a gun??

essentially said that mandatory registry was constitutional.

@directorblue: Dear President Obama, could we please keep our guns until you've caught all of the pro-Obama, pro-gun control, murderous leftists? #rkba #2a

 

In response to skeeter20's comment:

 

In response to tvoter's comment:

 

In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

 

In response to tvoter's comment: 

No no, really. You're drawing the wrong lesson from that precedent.

Clue: It made him look like a complete idiot.

 

Criminals do not register their guns now!!

 

How is making a law that says everyone must register their guns going to help stop criminals from getting guns? Criminals dont give a shlt about our gun laws!!

It's a assinine law that only affects law abiding citizens!

A govt that wants a record of everyone that has guns and where they are; should be feared by citizens that support the 2nd ammendment!

 

 

 

You will never get through to liberals or Democrats on this for one simple reason.  To citizens, criminals and crazies are a problem.  To Democrats, they are constituencies.

 

No other way to expalin the unwillingness to drop the boom on criminals and crazies, but instead drop the boom on law abiding citizens.

 

 

I think this is a lazy response - this proposal targets illegal gun owners, with the greatest "infringement" on rights being mandatory registration for purchasing ammo, which you do not reject outright.

BTW, the Heller decision may have strengthened gun rights, but by upholding licensing, it also essentially said that mandatory registry was constitutional.  Even pro-gun attorneys agree that it's constitutional.

In response to slomag's comment:

 

In response to skeeter20's comment:

 

In response to tvoter's comment:

 

In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

 

In response to tvoter's comment: 

No no, really. You're drawing the wrong lesson from that precedent.

Clue: It made him look like a complete idiot.

 

Criminals do not register their guns now!!

 

How is making a law that says everyone must register their guns going to help stop criminals from getting guns? Criminals dont give a shlt about our gun laws!!

It's a assinine law that only affects law abiding citizens!

A govt that wants a record of everyone that has guns and where they are; should be feared by citizens that support the 2nd ammendment!

 

 

 

You will never get through to liberals or Democrats on this for one simple reason.  To citizens, criminals and crazies are a problem.  To Democrats, they are constituencies.

 

No other way to expalin the unwillingness to drop the boom on criminals and crazies, but instead drop the boom on law abiding citizens.

 

 

I think this is a lazy response - this proposal targets illegal gun owners, with the greatest "infringement" on rights being mandatory registration for purchasing ammo, which you do not reject outright.

BTW, the Heller decision may have strengthened gun rights, but by upholding licensing, it also essentially said that mandatory registry was constitutional.  Even pro-gun attorneys agree that it's constitutional.

 

You would think that.

 

laws infringing Legal gun owners infringe legal gun owners. Criminals and crazies remain ustronger onestronger one supporters of liberal, progressive ideas and politicians.

I know it's a sentence, per se, but it makes no sense whatsoever.

Seriously, there are programs that you might want to look into. AA? Smart recovery?

 

In response to jedwardnicky's comment:

 

 

I know it's a sentence, per se, but it makes no sense whatsoever.

Seriously, there are programs that you might want to look into. AA? Smart recovery?

 

 

He's got to learn one day that not everyone has Hunter Thompson's gift.....

 

 

 

 

 

 

In response to skeeter20's comment:

 

In response to slomag's comment:

 

In response to skeeter20's comment:

 

In response to tvoter's comment:

 

In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

 

In response to tvoter's comment: 

No no, really. You're drawing the wrong lesson from that precedent.

Clue: It made him look like a complete idiot.

 

Criminals do not register their guns now!!

 

How is making a law that says everyone must register their guns going to help stop criminals from getting guns? Criminals dont give a shlt about our gun laws!!

It's a assinine law that only affects law abiding citizens!

A govt that wants a record of everyone that has guns and where they are; should be feared by citizens that support the 2nd ammendment!

 

 

 

You will never get through to liberals or Democrats on this for one simple reason.  To citizens, criminals and crazies are a problem.  To Democrats, they are constituencies.

 

No other way to expalin the unwillingness to drop the boom on criminals and crazies, but instead drop the boom on law abiding citizens.

 

 

I think this is a lazy response - this proposal targets illegal gun owners, with the greatest "infringement" on rights being mandatory registration for purchasing ammo, which you do not reject outright.

BTW, the Heller decision may have strengthened gun rights, but by upholding licensing, it also essentially said that mandatory registry was constitutional.  Even pro-gun attorneys agree that it's constitutional.

 

You would think that.

 

laws infringing Legal gun owners infringe legal gun owners. Criminals and crazies remain ustronger onestronger one supporters of liberal, progressive ideas and politicians.

 

Have you been drinking again?

 

"laws infringing Legal gun owners infringe legal gun owners."...legal gun owners are legal gun owners because they abide by the LAW.

"Criminals and crazies remain ustronger onestronger one supporters of liberal, progressive ideas and politicians."..... I know it's a sentence, per se, but it makes no sense whatsoever.

Seriously, there are programs that you might want to look into. AA? Smart recovery?