Gun registration-then-confiscation experiences

Status
Not open for further replies.
Has there been a time in history when any population has more guns and ammunition stashed than the American population does now?
Click to expand...

Probably not. We have, in the latter part of the 20th century become a very prosperous people, overall, much more so than our pioneer ancestors for whom only one gun might have to serve all uses simply because they didn't have or couldn't afford more.

Also, unlike many of the worlds other nations, we have not had cycles of despotic rulership where general individual arms ownership has been severely restricted or completely prohibited.

Yet
 
For clarification, I never suggest ANYONE violate the law within the jurisdiction of their area.

From my career as a law enforcement officer it was my observation that if I were able to shadow ANYONE for a period of no more than a week, I would observe them committing no less than one felony and probably more.
 
zoo said:
Frank, I didn't suggest 44AMP do anything. I asked him a question.
Click to expand...

Well, you did ask a question. But essentially the question you asked 44AMP was why he didn’t violate New York law (and perhaps federal law).
 
From my career as a law enforcement officer it was my observation that if I were able to shadow ANYONE for a period of no more than a week, I would observe them committing no less than one felony and probably more.
Click to expand...

I can see how this can happen, but I think you are painting with too broad a brush. When your only tool is a hammer, all your problems look like nails.

Which brings us back around to registration and confiscation. Gun control laws are the Govt's "hammer" used with the intent of controlling illegal behavior with guns. Registration "sets the nail" and confiscation hammers it flat. Problem solved from THEIR point of view.

Not so good for us nails, though...:rolleyes:
 
From my career as a law enforcement officer it was my observation that if I were able to shadow ANYONE for a period of no more than a week, I would observe them committing no less than one felony and probably more.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure how to read this. Does that mean that you think that everyday behavior has been so criminalized that everyone falls afoul of the law on a weekly basis, or are you completely convinced that there are no law-abiding people out there?
 
ghbucky said:
I'm not sure how to read this. Does that mean that you think that everyday behavior has been so criminalized that everyone falls afoul of the law on a weekly basis, or are you completely convinced that there are no law-abiding people out there?
Click to expand...


I’m a retired officer with 27 years.
Under your scenario, a traffic offense, absolutely. Even a misdemeanor, probably. But I would not say a felony. No way.
 
zoo said:
From my career as a law enforcement officer it was my observation that if I were able to shadow ANYONE for a period of no more than a week, I would observe them committing no less than one felony and probably more.
Click to expand...
I can see multiple misdemeanors. How about a few examples of the felonies everybody commits during a week?
 
I believe California Handgun registration goes back to 1920. Rifles have only be registered here since 2014 but the ammo background check is being used to help fill in the blanks!
 
Well, I'm not sure of the registration aspect but I lived in Scotland during the dunblane massacre.

After this, everything was banned and people were made to turn them in (so I'm assuming a rigorous registration was already enforced).
 
rc said:
I believe California Handgun registration goes back to 1920. Rifles have only be registered here since 2014 but the ammo background check is being used to help fill in the blanks!
Click to expand...
But has the registration resulted in confiscation?

That was the question.

I'm looking for people who have lived in places that instituted a registry for guns, who then duly registered their guns, only to have them confiscated later. I would like details.
Click to expand...
 
Aguila Blanca said:
But has the registration resulted in confiscation?
Click to expand...

California has outlawed possession of magazines over 10 rounds, even those that had been grandfathered under a ban of purchasing them. Making previously legally owned items illegal to own is confiscation in my book, even if the state has not yet come house - to - house to take custody. Registration would have come in handy once such a program started.

The law has since been declared unconstitutional - twice - and is now under further appeal. An injunction has prevented physical confiscation.
 
natman said:
California has outlawed possession of magazines over 10 rounds, even those that had been grandfathered under a ban of purchasing them. Making previously legally owned items illegal to own is confiscation in my book, even if the state has not yet come house - to - house to take custody. Registration would have come in handy once such a program started.

The law has since been declared unconstitutional - twice - and is now under further appeal. An injunction has prevented physical confiscation.
Click to expand...
I tried to make the point a few days ago that the law making something previously-legal into contraband without grandfathering current owners was a 5th amendment "taking", and the actual confiscation later is just a formality.
 
natman said:
The law has since been declared unconstitutional - twice - and is now under further appeal. An injunction has prevented physical confiscation.
Click to expand...
So ... there has not been any confiscation.

zxcvbob said:
I tried to make the point a few days ago that the law making something previously-legal into contraband without grandfathering current owners was a 5th amendment "taking", and the actual confiscation later is just a formality.
Click to expand...
I mostly agree with you, but I think the legal counterargument would be that you can still sell your "contraband" firearm to someone in a state where it's legal, so the state hasn't really "taken" any value from you. Of course, that argument eventually fails when you get to the "last man standing" questions: what happens when ALL the states make possession illegal?

Nonetheless, the question that was asked was where registration has led to confiscation. So far, nobody has come up with a concrete example.
 
zxcvbob said:
I tried to make the point a few days ago that the law making something previously-legal into contraband without grandfathering current owners was a 5th amendment "taking", and the actual confiscation later is just a formality.
Click to expand...

Yes, you wrote that. But you cited absolutely no legal authority (statutes/case law) to support that. In fact, in real life in the real world, that is not true.

You have generally demonstrated a poor understanding of law. What you believe is true is not necessarily true in real life in the real world. And your beliefs do not change what is true in real life in the real world.

As has been said here many times before, to understand the law, one needs to actually study it (whether formally or informally). Much in the law is non-intuitive or will make sense only when one has sufficient background knowledge. You can't expect to be able to figure out what the law is or how it works just by trying to "reason it out." One needs to do the research, study cases, and do the reading.
 
So far, nobody has come up with a concrete example.
Click to expand...

In the US, on a large scale? Without an alternate legal means of disposal of the property? Hasn't happened....yet...

"Assault weapon" owners in CA, NYC, and perhaps some other places I'm not aware of, got ordered to register their arms. Later, those guns became prohibited. Owners who were NOT "grandfathered" had the choice of turning them in (for no compensation) or removing them from the state / city.

We have, and have had for generations, registration leading to confiscation on an individual basis in those parts of the US with registration, ONCE the registered owner is no longer legally able to own them.

Become a prohibited person and your FOID is yanked and your guns are seized.
Die, and your guns may be seized, though there is (and should be) a process where they get returned to the estate for the executor to disposition them, it isn't always followed or even known about in some places.

These are individual, case by case things, not what I think the OP is looking for.
 
Aguila Blanca said:
So ... there has not been any confiscation.
Click to expand...

It depends on your definition of "confiscation". If only having the object in question physically taken from its owner fits your definition, then no. However the state HAS made the object illegal to own and has been prevented from physically confiscating them only by an injunction, pending appeal.
 
natman said:
Aguila Blanca said:
So ... there has not been any confiscation.
Click to expand...
It depends on your definition of "confiscation". If only having the object in question physically taken from its owner fits your definition, then no. However the state HAS made the object illegal to own and has been prevented from physically confiscating them only by an injunction, pending appeal.
Click to expand...
So, to reiterate ... there has not been any confiscation.
 
mehavey said:
Well.... we're about to find out.
Click to expand...

I don't see anything in Biden's proposals that entails actual confiscation.

In fact, I haven't seen anything in this thread that entails actual confiscation. We keep veering off the original subject into speculation, and we're going around in circles.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top